24 July 2014

This publication was produced for review by the Agency for International Development. It was prepared by ICMA and CENN.

Waste Management Technologies in Regions, Waste Management Technologies in Regions, Georgia

Solid Waste Collection and Recycling Systems Assessment Report

USAID Cooperative Agreement AID-114-LA-14-00001

Prepared for: Mission Environmental Office Economic Growth Office USAID |

Prepared by: International City/County Management Association 777 North Capitol Street NE, Suite 500 Washington, DC 20002-4201

The authors’ views expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the views of the United States Agency for International Development or the United States Government.

Solid Waste Collection and Recycling Systems Assessment Report ii

Waste Management Technologies in Regions, Georgia

Table of Contents ACRONYMS ...... v 1. BASIS AND OBJECTIVES OF THIS ASSESSMENT ...... 6 2. NATIONAL PERSPECTIVES ON SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT IN GEORGIA ...... 6 2.1 Policies and Legal Framework ...... 7 2.2 Relevant Government Institutions ...... 9 2.3 Financial and Economic Mechanisms ...... 10 2.4 Solid Waste Generation and Composition ...... 11 2.8 National and Donor Supported Initiatives Pertinent To Project Results ...... 17 3. CURRENT SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT IN THE AUTONOMOUS REPUBLIC OF .... 17 3.1 Demographics and Regional SWM Background ...... 17 3.2 Solid Waste Generation and Characteristics ...... 17 3.3 Status of Solid Waste Management Services and Infrastructure ...... 18 4. CURRENT SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT IN REGION ...... 19 4.1 Demographics and Regional SWM Background ...... 19 4.2 Solid Waste Generation and Characteristics ...... 20 4.3 Status of Solid Waste Management Services and Infrastructure ...... 20 5. TECHNICAL/PLANNING/ECONOMIC/MANAGEMENT GAPS AND NEEDS SUMMARY ...... 21 6. PROJECT ACTIVITY RECOMMENDATIONS AND ACTION PLANS ...... 21 6.1 Recommended Focus of Planning Assistance ...... 21 6.2 Target 1.4 ‐ Design region‐specific ISWM strategies and action plans ...... 24 6.3 Target 1.5 ‐ Conduct capacity and training gap analysis of municipalities and SW companies ...... 25 6.4 Target 1.6 ‐ Provide tailored assistance, and training to municipalities and SWM companies ...... 25 6.5 Target 1.7 ‐ Assist waste collection companies in developing and implementing business plans that will improve the admin., management, collection, efficient transportation, separation, sorting and disposal of wastes, and increase the supply of recyclable materials to recycling companies ...... 26 6.6 Target 1.8 ‐ Design and implement a city‐to‐city exchange program ...... 26 6.7 Target 1.9 ‐ Implement pilots via partial grant to assist recycling companies to produce special bins for recyclable materials and distribute in selected municipalities, including national parks ...... 26

Solid Waste Collection and Recycling Systems Assessment Report iii

Waste Management Technologies in Regions, Georgia

6.8 Target 1.10 ‐ Support the implementation of small‐scale composting activities ...... 26 6.9 Target 1.11 ‐ Develop landfill remediation/closure plans ...... 27 ANNEX 1 ...... 28 ANNEX 2 ...... 33 ANNEX 3 ...... 37 ANNEX 4 ...... 42 GLOSSARY OF SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT TERMS ...... 43

Solid Waste Collection and Recycling Systems Assessment Report iv

Waste Management Technologies in Regions, Georgia

ACRONYMS

AOR Agreement Officer Representative CAPEX Capital expenditures CBO Community‐based organization CENN Caucasus Environmental NGO Network COP Chief of Party DCOP Deputy Chief of Party EBRD European Bank for Reconstruction and Development EIA Environmental Impact Assessment EU European Union GHG Greenhouse gas GOG Government of Georgia ICMA International City/County Management Association ISC Institute for Sustainable Communities ISWM Integrated solid waste management KfW German Credit Bank for Reconstruction LLC Limited Liability Company M&E Monitoring and evaluation MESD Ministry of Economy and Sustainable Development MENRP Ministry of Environment and Natural Resource Protection MRDI Ministry of Regional Development and Infrastructure MSW Municipal Solid Waste OPEX Operating expenditures PMP Performance Monitoring Plan SIDA Swedish International Development Agency STTA Short‐term technical advisor SWM Solid waste management SWMCG Solid Waste Management Company of Georgia TA Technical assistance USAID United States Agency for International Development WMTR Waste Management Technologies in Regions

Solid Waste Collection and Recycling Systems Assessment Report v

Waste Management Technologies in Regions, Georgia

1. BASIS AND OBJECTIVES OF THIS ASSESSMENT

The USAID funded Waste Management Technologies in the Regions ‐ Georgia Project (the Project) is intended to assist the Adjara Autonomous Republic and Kakheti region of Georgia to enhance their existing Solid Waste Management (SWM) facilities and services. (In this assessment report, the term “SWM” will relate to existing core solid waste management services and facilities whereas the term “Integrated Solid Waste Management (ISWM) will relate to the proposed solid waste management programs that will result from the new solid waste law and strategy currently under consideration by the Government of Georgia.)

Component 1 of the Project seeks to support an objective of accomplishing an “Established waste management system and an improved implementing capacity of the public and private sector”. Through the designated activities of Component 1 of the Project, ICMA is required to undertake an initial assessment of existing SWM situations in the target regions to determine the institutional, technical and economic characteristics of current SWM practices and the manner by which they can be improved through Project activities and results. The assessment is also intended to define a meaningful role for the Project to accomplish its results within the context of other ongoing SWM initiatives in Georgia including other waste related projects supported by various donor agencies and multinational banks that have been active in Georgia. The assessment also seeks to define activities that are within the context of pending legal reforms (including the expected adoption of a new national waste law and the development of a new national ISWM strategy and plan). By design, the Project is focusing on the management of Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) derived from residential and commercial sources in the target regions. As a result, the scope of this assessment does not include a detailed consideration of other, often independently managed, solid waste forms such as construction debris, biomedical waste, industrial waste and hazardous waste except as to the manner in which these waste forms may affect the provision of MSW management related services in the target regions.

This assessment report aims to establish an initial preliminary foundation for defining and commencing the activities that the Project will undertake while meeting the Project’s accomplishment and output goals as defined in its Implementation and Performance Monitoring Plans (PMP). Annex 3 of this assessment report presents recommended action plans and projected timelines for accomplishing various near term recommended activities that meet the objectives of the Project PMP and support the cooperation, actions and progress of the beneficiaries both nationally and specifically in the two target regions.

2. NATIONAL PERSPECTIVES ON SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT IN GEORGIA

In general, solid waste management conditions and processes in Georgia are deficient where municipal collection programs typically do not provide full service coverage to all of a municipality’s residents, disposal sites are poorly located and operated and there is minimal recovery of recyclable or compostable materials. However, it appears that the Government of Georgia recognizes this situation and there are a number of ongoing governmental initiatives that should improve overall sector performance and SWM related environmental conditions throughout Georgia in the future. A draft comprehensive “Code on Waste Management” and an accompanying draft National Waste Management Strategy have been prepared and are now being considered by the Government. Once adopted, these will provide both structure and programming to the manner by which all forms of solid waste must be managed throughout Georgia in the future and will certainly apply to the target regions.

General SWM sector performance criteria and institutional responsibilities that are anticipated to be defined by the new national law and strategy will require fundamental changes in MSW collection,

Solid Waste Collection and Recycling Systems Assessment Report 6

Waste Management Technologies in Regions, Georgia

transport, treatment, and disposal processes throughout Georgia. Accordingly, the Project is well placed to assist key participants in the Georgian SWM sector to anticipate and meet the expected requirements (and challenges) that they will face in coming years to comply with the intent of the national law and strategy.

The pace at which SWM sector performance in Georgia is improved in the near term will, most likely, be stimulated by the recent Association Agreement between the Government of Georgia and the European Union which is expected to require SWM sector improvements to meet current and emerging E.U. standards while also possibly providing additional financial resources to accomplish them. For example, the E.U.‐Georgia Association Agreement places the responsibility on the Government of Georgia to implement the requirements of E.U. Directive 1999/31/EC on the landfill of waste as amended by Regulation (EC) 1882/2003. This will significantly influence the development and design of new landfills throughout Georgia while also placing a strong emphasis on the need to divert recyclables and biodegradable materials from landfill disposal. Both of these factors are inherent to the current drafts of the proposed national law and strategy. To accomplish the new standards, significant institutional strengthening will be required along with the development or enhancement of market outlets for the recyclable and compostable components of the MSW stream that can be diverted away from landfill disposal. Expected higher design and performance standards and an increased emphasis on recovery processes are anticipated requirements that create a foundation for a number of the recommended assistance activities defined in this assessment report that seek to help develop a classic Integrated Solid Waste Management approach in the country where the conventional solid waste management hierarchy is utilized as a guiding principal. This hierarchy emphasizes the utilization of solid waste stream components as a means of diverting them from landfill disposal.

The future responsibilities and actions by local governments in both the Kakheti and Adjara regions will be specifically defined by the eventual national law, strategies and action plans and the likely framework (and possible legal mandate) for improving ISWM conditions. For the purpose of this initial assessment, analysis was completed on the basis of the existing situations, as will be described below. The assessment further incorporated the assessor’s experience in anticipating future regional and local requirements based on existing SWM sector development dynamics in Georgia and the likely standards that will emerge from the new legal framework and the evolving Georgia/E.U. relationship.

2.1 Policies and Legal Framework

Currently, Georgia does not have a national policy or effective laws that relate to municipal solid waste management. This results in an existing SWM legal and institutional framework that is fragmented and insufficient to require or achieve reasonable SWM sector and environmental performance or meet pending E.U. harmonization targets. The absence of an effective policy and legal framework with an effective regulatory and enforcement structure makes it extremely difficult to achieve commonly accepted sound practice ISWM results which are believed to be the intent of the government in considering the proposed new law and strategy.

The current legal/policy framework for SWM in Georgia is based on a number of laws and policy statements that are generally aimed at addressing environmental conditions in Georgia. These include the following:

 The Law on Environmental Impact Permits ‐ requires permits for all operators of waste processing facilities, municipal solid waste treatment facilities, landfills, incineration plants waste storage facilities and wastewater treatment plants, as well as hazardous waste treatment facilities. (By law, solid waste collection and transport processes do not require a permit as well as some recycling activities such as paper recycling.)

 Framework Law on Environmental Protection of 1996 ‐ presents a general basis for

Solid Waste Collection and Recycling Systems Assessment Report 7

Waste Management Technologies in Regions, Georgia

environmental protection in Georgia.

 Resolution of the Minister of Economics and the Minister of Environmental and Natural Resources Protection No. 131‐197 on the Rules for Removing Solid and Liquid Municipal Waste ‐ 1996

 Order of the Minister of Labour, Health Care and Social Protection No. 300/N on the Adoption of Rules for the Collection, Storage and Treatment of Medical Waste – 2001

 Decree of the Government of Georgia No. 184 of 2006 relating to production, transportation, import, export, re‐export or transit of restricted materials.

 The State Strategy for Regional Development of Georgia for 2010‐2017 ‐ defines the main principles and objectives of regional development policy in Georgia and stipulates appropriate conditions for sustainable development throughout the country including a consideration of the risk of polluting the environment and affecting public health through improper waste management practices.

 The National Environmental Action Plan of Georgia (2012‐2016) ‐ stipulates, in general terms, the establishment of a modern system of waste management in Georgia as one of its principal and long‐term goals. Key measures identified to accomplish this objective include the closure of substandard disposal facilities and their replacement with the construction of new, sound practice landfills.

While the above provide a broad basis for the government’s intended environmental control actions and includes some considerations of ISWM initiatives, a lack of well‐defined criteria and standards (as well as specific regulations and an effective enforcement mechanism) pertaining to various SWM processes and facilities provides no appreciable mandate, structure or regulatory driver for providing or improving SWM services in Georgia or for implementing new environmentally sound MSW treatment and disposal facilities. The current legal and policy framework does not provide a definition of “waste” or a basis for waste categorization as a resource which may actually be a legal impediment to developing viable recovery processes and facilities under the existing national SWM legal framework. Mechanisms do not exist to characterize and accumulate data on the physical aspects of the solid waste stream generated in Georgia or its regional and local areas. As a result, there is little physical data on waste generation rates and composition that will be necessary for design of future recovery processes and facilities. Such information will be key to determining the technical and, most importantly, economic viability of new MSW “sorting plants” such as the implementation of materials recovery facilities. (It is noteworthy that many of the stakeholders interviewed during the assessment field work in each target region referenced the need for “sorting plants” in their municipalities without fully understanding the technical and economic dynamics associated with such facilities.)

As a result of the above, there is currently no sufficient legal planning basis or mandate to serve as a guide for:

 Developing local ISWM plans (as will most likely be necessary in the future upon adoption of the pending waste code);  Creating or enhancing economic and financial instruments to achieve meaningful progress; and  Making the correct local decisions for establishing effective and expanded collection services and developing new infrastructure that provides a cost effective and environmental sound means of integrated solid waste management.

Solid Waste Collection and Recycling Systems Assessment Report 8

Waste Management Technologies in Regions, Georgia

The above stresses the importance of the final adoption of the proposed waste law or code and the following development of a national waste management strategy and action plan that will certainly affect the manner by which solid waste is managed in the target regions. Recommendations contained in this assessment report assume that a new waste law and strategy will be adopted by the Government of Georgia in the near future as a means for enhancing the development drivers to improve SWM practices throughout the country and create new ISWM initiatives.

2.2 Relevant Government Institutions

The nature of future SWM activities in the Kakheti and Adjara regions will be strongly influenced by the responsibilities and actions of Georgian governmental agencies that will have a key role in administering a national ISWM program where national, regional and local governmental units play an important role. While the ultimate competencies of various national ministries is currently unclear (and yet to be specifically defined through adoption of the pending waste management code), it is anticipated that the following national (and Adjara Autonomous Republic) governmental entities will be important to achieving the Project’s desired results in the target regions.

 The Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources Protection (MENRP) ‐ The Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources Protection will, most likely, be responsible for waste management planning under the new legal and policy framework. This will also include responsibility for: 1) compiling and collecting sufficient and good quality waste related data (as will be collected by the Environmental Information and Education Center), 2) elaborating new standards through development and implementation of specific rules and regulations, 3) developing periodically updated strategies and plans based on ongoing sector progress, experiences and results, 4) monitoring and controlling waste and SWM sector performance to established standards through effective enforcement, and 5) issuing required permits,

 The Ministry of Regional Development and Infrastructure (MRDI) – The Ministry of Regional Development and Infrastructure is currently responsible for providing effective solid waste disposal throughout Georgia except for the City of and the Adjara Autonomous Republic. To that end, MRDI established a state‐owned Solid Waste Management Company of Georgia (SWMCG) in 2012 that was created to initially improve operational standards at the existing official dump sites in the country. As a result, the SWMCG assumed control of all official disposal facilities in Georgia (except for Tbilisi and Adjara) and, in 2013, began physically improving conditions at many of these landfill sites including the official disposal areas in the Kakheti region. The stated long term objective of MRDI and the SWMCG is to site and construct new regional landfills and transfer stations that will comply with international sound practice standards consistent with those that currently exist in the European Union. Once these new regional facilities have been constructed, the SWMCG will undertake formal closure of the existing official dump sites within their control that will no longer be needed for disposal. (It should be noted that there are ongoing discussions concerning the future roles of the MENRP and MRDI in Georgia’s SWM sector. This appears to center on the future role that the SWMCG will have in the management of the new regional landfills and transfer system. The MENRP appears to have a preference that, once developed, the regional landfills and transfer network should be outsourced with more local control through regional entities comprised of the municipalities within each new disposal site’s service area. A final resolution of these assigned competencies may require some minor modification of the activities to be undertaken by the Project at the time when more clarity is brought to the issue of their future institutional functions as will, most likely, be defined in the new Waste Code when it is adopted.

 The Ministry of Economy and Sustainable Development (MESD) ‐ By virtue of its role in public financial matters in Georgia including regular budget and special disbursements to local governments, the MESD will have an ongoing important role in ensuring that sufficient funds will be available to achieve the necessary improvements throughout the SWM sector. While the

Solid Waste Collection and Recycling Systems Assessment Report 9

Waste Management Technologies in Regions, Georgia

ultimate goal of the MESD is expected to be supportive of achieving self‐sufficiency of the SWM sector through user fees, etc., initial and possibly long‐term subsidization through the national budget may be required to meet the likely increased cost of meeting new higher standards and implementing new disposal and processing facilities in the future.

 Autonomous Republic of Adjara – As an autonomous republic, the Adjara region has a number of governmental agencies that will continue to play an important role in solid waste management in the region. These include the Adjara Ministry of Finance and Economy and the Adjara Environmental Protection and Natural Resources Division. These agencies will be expected to provide a greater focus on ISWM issues specific to the Adjara region.

 Municipalities and their Limited Liability Companies ‐ Municipalities in the Kakheti region and the Adjara Autonomous Republic are currently responsible for planning their MSW management activities, defining and collecting tariff fees, tendering and awarding collection/transport service contracts, supervising and overseeing waste collection/transport and street cleaning service delivery. Commonly, Georgian municipalities in both regions are faced with the ongoing issue of expanding the coverage of their municipal services including solid waste collection to outlying villages and rural areas. It is not envisioned that the above municipal responsibilities will change as a result of the new waste law and national strategy. However, the municipalities may face the additional challenge of closing and remediating informal disposal sites in their service areas especially those where the municipality’s collection service is provided.

2.3 Financial and Economic Mechanisms

National government budget appropriations have been the source of funding for the development and activities of the SWMCG. Funds for municipal SWM services and assets are commonly derived from municipal budgets with minimal contribution from solid waste generator (residential and business) tariffs. Financial assistance from donor agencies and multinational banks has led to the planning and development of new E.U. standard landfills in a number of location including the Adjara region. An example of the current financial/economic cash flow structure for SWM services is

Georgian VAT National Government VAT Income Tax

Adjarian Sandasuptaveba Republic Profit Tax LTD Government Wages Cleaning Services Solid Waste Purchases Products Collection and and Services Transport

KOBULETI Financial Payments

Property Tax and Fee Income

Contract Collection Fees KEDA

CASH FLOW CHART FOR ADJARA REGION

KHULO

Solid Waste Collection and Recycling Systems Assessment Report 10

Waste Management Technologies in Regions, Georgia

shown in the following figure which illustrates the current cash flow mechanisms in the Adjara region where the Batumi owned Limited Liability Company (Sandasuptaveba LTD) provides a regional collection and transport service to all municipalities in the region. A similar cash flow arrangement exists in Kakheti except that each Kakheti municipality has its own LLC that provides services in the municipality.

As illustrated, funds to support SWM services in the municipalities are derived from a number of sources which, theoretically, include tariff payment sources. An important element of the Project in addressing cash flow issues related to new disposal and processing facilities will be the optimization of cost recovery from solid waste generators. Component 3 of the Project seeks to optimize tariff contributions through reform.

The above cash flow pattern may be altered in the future due to the likely imposition of disposal (tipping) fees at the new regional landfills once they are in operation. Ultimately, decisions will need to be made as to whether these regional landfill disposal fees are paid directly by the municipalities (based on the actual tonnage of solid waste received from each municipality) or paid by the LLCs who would then most likely pass the charges on to the municipalities. The higher costs associated with the new landfills will need to be borne by the existing cash flow structure of the SWM system. While enhanced cost recovery can help to cover some of this added cost, budget allocations and additional support from the national government budget may still be necessary to sustain the level of disposal service expected of the new landfills.

2.4 Solid Waste Generation and Composition

There is little information available on the total quantity and composition of municipal solid waste generated in Georgia and in the municipalities in the target regions. Waste characterization studies for project planning in Tbilisi, Kvemo Approximate Composition of MSW in Georgia Kartli and have defined the 0.3% approximate MSW composition shown in

1.4% the figure to the left . Some variation in 12.4% 3.7% 42.1% composition may occur in the target 2.2% regions as a result of prevailing

14.6% conditions that affect general solid waste

generation and composition. Accordingly,

4.5% waste characterization studies (as a probable Project activity) may be 11.3% 7.7% required in the future for planning and Food Paper and cardboard Plastics design of facilities and processes that are Textile, rubber, leather Garden green waste Wood Glass Metals Inert waste particularly dependent on waste Hazardous composition such as waste treatment and

Source: Draft National Solid Waste Management Strategy 5.07.2013 recovery facilities. 2.5 Technology and Technical Approaches

Collection and Transport ‐ Municipalities in Georgia are currently responsible for collecting and transporting MSW generated within their jurisdiction. Commonly, this responsibility is delegated to an LLC working under contract to the municipality which is secured based on an annual tender process as required through the national procurement law in Georgia. A conventional primary/secondary collection configuration is typically utilized in Georgia’s municipalities. Through the primary collection process, residential and some small scale commercial waste generators are required to transport (carry) and place their solid waste materials into containers located in vicinity of their residences or businesses. The secondary collection process provided by the municipal LLC collects the accumulated solid waste from the containers on a regular basis and transports it to disposal locations. The manner in which this secondary collection process is provided is primarily a

Solid Waste Collection and Recycling Systems Assessment Report 11

Waste Management Technologies in Regions, Georgia

function of the type of containers and collection vehicles utilized in each community for the secondary collection process. Technical approaches range from the use of basic containers that must be manually emptied into conventional tipper trucks to the use of specialized E.U. standard containers and vehicles that allow automatic container unloading and, accordingly, considerably less manual labor. The size of the containers typically deployed in areas with collection service varies from 0.18 to 1.1 cubic meters in size. Up to 200 households would typically be serviced by one 1.1 cubic meter container in an effective container deployment configuration. However, the actual service ratio seemed to vary significantly in the municipalities visited during the assessment fieldwork. In most municipalities at some container location, multiple containers are deployed based on the amount of solid waste regularly collected at that particular location. This deployment may vary depending on seasonal variation of waste generation such as that experience in areas that attract tourists. Tourism can also lead to a seasonal variation in the frequency at which the containers are emptied by the municipal LLC collectors.

In all municipalities observed during the assessment field work in both regions (except Batumi in the Adjara region), formal and frequent collection service was limited to urban core areas and main roads as well as some villages located in close proximity to municipality central areas. Remote villages (that are often in locations with limited truck access) are typically not served by a municipality’s formal collection program thereby leading to the continued use of illegal community‐ based dumpsites for disposal purposes. Most municipal officials interviewed as a result of the assessment field work indicated that the need to expand service coverage to unserved villages is one of their major SWM issues.

The procurement of municipal services (such as those provided by the LLCs) is regulated by the Law of Georgia on State Procurement where Article 1.2 stipulates that the law applies to all state procurement, except procurements connected the state security. This law states that all municipal services must be tendered and that resulting contracts be no longer than one year. This tender and contracting basis created by the current procurement law precludes the realistic possibility of regular competition to the municipal LLCs in providing collection and cleansing services. This poor competitive environment is compounded by the fact that the LLCs may not only receive payments for providing their services through the annual contract with the municipalities but may also benefit from direct investments by the municipalities in collection service assets (new trucks and containers) that are assigned to the LLC's.

Recovery – Informal recycling practices exist in Georgia, but their current impact on the SWM sector is negligible. Organized schemes for separate collection of recyclables or compostable materials were not found in any municipality in the target regions during the assessment fieldwork. Separate collection of recyclables (particularly metal and glass) is currently provided by the informal sector where individuals collect recyclables with sufficient value and sell them to local brokers or consolidators. For example, private scrap metal depots or consolidation locations were observed in many of the municipalities in each region. These facilities purchase metal directly from generators or from informal recyclers. In some cases, mobile collectors were observed that sought collection of recoverable materials while driving through the municipalities and announcing their presence and willingness to purchase metal materials.

Approximate Disposition of Recyclable Materials While discussions with municipal officials in Recyclable Fraction Exported Recycled Landfilled the Kakheti region indicated that informal recycling historically occurred at local Ferrous Metal Scrap 50.5% 41.5% 8.0% Glass 10.0% 90.0% ‐ dump sites, this practice generally ceased when the SWMCG assumed control of the Cardboard 9.5% 0.4% 90.1% official disposal sites and began limiting Paper ‐ 0.8% 99.2% access through fencing and full‐time Plastics 1.6% 0.4% 98.0% staffing. Source: the Greens Movement of Georgia, 2012

Solid Waste Collection and Recycling Systems Assessment Report 12

Waste Management Technologies in Regions, Georgia

As shown in the table below, some data exists that indicates that the overall recovery rate for glass and ferrous scrap metal in Georgia is high but negligible for other MSW recoverable elements such as paper, cardboard, and plastics. This is primarily due to the network of the scrap metal depots that will buy metal from generators or informal recyclers. Glass recycling is also a function of the direct actions taken by generators in managing this material as well as the activities of informal recyclers. While some market limited outlets exist for paper and plastic materials in Georgia, market conditions and values, as well as the lack of any governmental support for source separation or other recovery processes, have not led to a significant level of recovery of these materials. Further information regarding existing private sector based market outlets in Georgia will be presented in the independent Component 2 assessment process.

It is noteworthy that most of the local, regional and national officials consulted during the assessment field work indicated an interest in developing “waste sorting facilities” in their municipalities. However, it appears that there is a general lack of understanding on the part of these municipal officials that there is an economy of scale for materials recovery facilities where a minimum amount of processible material must be available (along with viable markets for the recovered materials) to establish economic viability and sustainability. In addition, the SWMCG indicated a concern that any locally based recycling/recovery programs could threaten the viability of the regional material recovery facilities that they envision as a component of their long term plans. This would seem to suggest a need for added clarity on what it takes to establish economic viability and sustainability for recovery processes and facilities. Also, in assisting the Kakheti municipalities to develop their solid waste management plans, the SWMCG should be consulted to determine their plans for developing resource recovery facilities and programs in the regions. The most viable alternatives for the municipalities in achieving the optimum diversion of solid waste from landfill disposal should be evaluated to determine if the best alternatives for the municipalities is a local facility or a regional facility developed by the SWMCG.

In accordance with the Georgia ‐ E.U. Association Agreement, treatment of all waste reaching landfill sites will be mandatory in accordance with Association Agreement Waste Chapter (EC 1999/31 EC, Article 6). Since treatment will, most likely, be the responsibility of either the waste generator/ holder (municipalities) or the landfill operator (SWMCG), it is important that both potentially responsible parties are informed and plan their activities in a manner that achieves the best recovery result. The Project should endeavor to define the recovery process and the best means for accomplishing it within the context of the Association Agreement with the European Union.

Disposal – At the time that the SWMCG assumed legal responsibility for the official disposal sites in Georgia, there were 69 such sites and only six of the sites possessed a formal environmental impact permit. The number of legal and illegal landfills in each Georgian region is presented in the figure below. As shown, there were 13 (5 legal and 8 illegal) landfill sites in the Adjara Region and 12 (11 legal and 1 illegal) landfill sites in the Kakheti Region at the time that the information was provided by MOERP in 2011. While some of these sites were no longer utilized after the SWMCG assumed responsibility for the legal disposal locations, the SWMCG has begun the process of securing the disposal sites, consolidating and covering accumulated waste materials and increasing site security through fencing and full time staffing.

In addition to the major official disposal areas referenced above, there are numerous smaller informal dumpsites in many village locations that are in use because of a lack of formal SWM collection services. In municipalities in both target regions, expansion of the collection service to accessible nearby villages have led to the closure of some of these illegal random dumpsites. However, the extent of physical work done by the municipalities in closing and cleaning up these sites varies significantly and needs to be determined.

Solid Waste Collection and Recycling Systems Assessment Report 13

Waste Management Technologies in Regions, Georgia

16 14 12 Illegal landfills 10 8 6 4 2 0

Number of Formal Legal and Illegal Landfill Sites in Georgia (Source MOERP – 2011)

2.6 Status of Conventional SWM Development Drivers in Georgia

A development driver is any factor that creates or fuels an activity. In solid waste management, this can include a number of conventional drivers that are usually in the control of various entities directly involved (service providers, regulators, etc.) or tangential (financial institutions, etc.) to the actual process of providing ISWM services and developing new processes. The following presents a description of the relevant development drivers for solid waste activities as well as a general assessment of their current status in supporting SWM sector improvements in Georgia.

 Regulatory – The regulatory driver is based on the mandate and enforcement of specific rules and regulations for all types of ISWM activities and facilities. A strong regulatory driver will compel required actions by responsible stakeholders in their roles in an ISWM process. The legal and regulatory framework that currently exists in Georgia and a lack of an effective enforcement mechanism does not provide a sufficient regulatory driver for the necessary actions to develop an effective ISWM program. However, the pending Code on Waste Management and the subsequent adoption of a national solid waste management strategy and plan as well as the emerging cooperative relationship with the European Union can significantly enhance the regulatory driver and its impact on future ISWM actions.

 Economic – The economic driver is based on possible economic gain that can be derived from a SWM action. For example, the development of transfer stations for transport of solid waste to remote regional disposal locations can help reduce the cost of collection and transport and, thereby, economically drive the development of such facilities. In a region like Kakheti where existing disposal areas currently serving individual municipalities are apt to be closed in the future and replaced with a E.U. standard regional landfill, increased transport distances for collected solid waste for some municipalities will be required and may significantly increase transport costs thereby enhancing the economic driver. The development of transfer stations can help to mitigate the increased transport costs once the new regional landfills are in operation and current local disposal sites are closed. In addition, future tipping fees that may be charged at the new regional landfills will, most likely, have to be paid by municipalities (directly or through their LLCs) for disposal. These tipping fees (which will likely be based on the actual tonnage of solid waste delivered to the landfills as determined by a weighbridge system at the landfills) can enhance the economic driver for waste recovery/recycling/composting processes since there will be a greater economic incentive to divert solid waste components from disposal sites through recovery programs which may be less expensive than transport to and disposal at the new regional landfills. While the general status of the economic driver for SWM action is currently weak in Georgia, a gradual increase in the overall cost of effective solid waste

Solid Waste Collection and Recycling Systems Assessment Report 14

Waste Management Technologies in Regions, Georgia

management services and facilities will help stimulate the economic driver for various SWM processes.

 Political – The Political Driver is based on the actions of local, regional and national leaders in their support of effective ISWM processes and facilities. The recent cooperative agreement between Georgia and the European Union may be an indication of a growing national political driver that will impact future activities in enhancing ISWM throughout Georgia. In addition, the strong local support of municipal officials can be important in assuring that a high priority is given to budget allocations for improving or expanding solid waste collection services thereby driving investments through an enhanced political driver. Differences observed in the quality and extent of collection assets associated with the municipal collection programs observed during the assessment field work in the Kakheti region may be a function of local political driver which has led to more investments in improving services in some municipalities than others.

 Environmental – The Environmental Driver is based on the prospects of negative environmental and health effects due to substandard SWM processes and facilities. For example, improperly sited disposal areas near water bodies may create an enhanced environmental driver for development of new landfill facilities at more appropriate locations to replace the existing sites. The pending national law and strategy will be important in providing more specificity and enforceable performance standards that have to be met by SWM service providers thereby enhancing the impact of the environmental driver. Adopting standards consistent with the current European Union legal and regulatory ISWM framework will significantly enhance the environmental driver in Georgia particularly in its promotion of an effective regulatory process to minimize environmental effects. In addition, the environmental driver may become more forceful as a result of the Component 4 public awareness elements of the Project that will help the public in the target regions understand the environmental and health consequences of existing substandard facilities and poor SWM practices.

 Social – The social driver is based on the response of people to the function of existing SWM processes. For example, public outcry due to major littering problems resulting from an ineffective collection program or indiscriminate random dumping can create a strong social driver for ISWM program improvements. However, general observations made during the assessment field work showed that current collection programs in the urban centers of the municipalities in the target regions are reasonably effective given the financial and technical resource deficiencies that exist in most of the municipalities particularly in the Kakheti region. However, a lower level of service or no service in outlying village and rural areas in all of the municipalities can impact a localized social driver due to requests by residents and businesses of unserved areas for expanded collection service coverage. In addition, while some level of informal recycling may still be occurring from collection containers, most of the informal recycling at the official disposal sites now under the control of the SWMCG has been eliminated in the Kakheti region. In other countries where this control has not occurred, the prevalence of informal recyclers at disposal areas and the conditions under which they live and work at those sites often becomes a strong social driver for improving the conditions that these people are exposed to.

While the Project aims to enhance the development drivers for implementation of effective ISWM programs in the Kakheti and Adjara regions, it should be clearly recognized that the ultimate future strength of any of the drivers and their ability to stimulate the necessary SWM actions will not solely be a function of the Project activities and outputs. While the Project will help to enhance the drivers for required ISWM actions, other considerations by the Government of Georgia and its institutions, as well as local/regional governmental units, will be necessary for the drivers to be sufficient for implementation of an effective ISWM system throughout the country (as now defined in the draft national code and strategy). Accordingly, the Project should keep a flexible position throughout its 5

Solid Waste Collection and Recycling Systems Assessment Report 15

Waste Management Technologies in Regions, Georgia

year term to react to major occurrences (final adoption of a new National Code on Waste Management and subsequent strategy and action plan, for example) which will provide additional direction, methodology, mandates and timelines that beneficiaries will have to meet. This flexibility will enhance the ultimate benefits and results of the Project.

2.7 Environmental Impacts of Existing Facilities and Practices

While there is little actual data on specific measured environmental impacts associated with existing SWM processes and facilities in Georgia, it can be safely assumed that there are a number of negative environmental consequences associated with current practices and facilities. These include the following:

 Groundwater and surface water impacts due to improperly sited and operated disposal areas with few or no environmental safeguards.

 Groundwater, surface water and land pollution due to many random informal dumping areas particularly in remote or inaccessible village areas not serviced by formal collection programs.

 Air pollution caused by uncontrolled fires at some of the existing landfills or backyard burning of solid waste by households in villages not serviced by the formal collection program

 Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions resulting from existing disposal areas which have varied site physical conditions and are typically utilized as uncontrolled dumps on expansive areas with no compaction, covering or environmental control features. New E.U. standard landfills will, most likely, include landfill gas treatment systems that are installed once sufficient gas is generated to justify the installation of these systems. (This issue will be evaluated in detail in another phase of Component 1 of the Project focusing on the GHG impact of current SWM practices in Georgia and the means for mitigating them.) It is important to note that the entire GHG mitigation effect of the Project will be a function of optimizing all of the processes that will define the function of the proposed ISWM programs in Georgia. While the mitigation of methane emissions from existing and future disposal sites is an important GHG related element of improving SWM conditions in Georgia, additional benefits will be derived by optimizing collection and transport systems as well as promoting a greater degree of materials recovery through processing, recycling or composting applications. For example, effective recovery programs can lead to a reduction in the use of virgin materials for manufacture of various products. This can help decrease the energy required for deriving the virgin materials and manufacturing products thereby helping to mitigate GHG emissions through the reduction of energy required from generating facilities. Key elements of the capacity building and public awareness aspects of the Project should be the creation of a better understanding of the impact of improved SWM processes and facilities on climate change issues. The government of the Adjara Autonomous Republic has already recognized the importance of climate change issues through the development of an assessment which includes consideration of SWM effects. The government of Georgia, as a non‐annex country, has prepared and communicated a National Review to the UNFCCC and the 3rd Review attempts to quantify GHG emissions from landfills in Georgia. The Climate Change Division of the Georgian Ministry of Environment (in response to Georgia’s responsibilities to the UNFCCC), and with the help of the UNDP Georgia office, prepares national communications every 3 to 5 years. (The frequency of completion and submission of the national communications from non‐Annex I Parties is determined by the timeframes set in accordance with, Article 12, paragraph 5, of the Convention (UNFCCC Resource Guide.http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/publications/09_resource_guide1.pdf.) For this purpose, the Climate Change Division estimates GHG related impacts from all sectors (including waste management). While these review reports do not provide considerable detail concerning each landfill and dump site in each region, they do possess some information for most of the disposal areas which allows the Climate Change Division to present a general assessment of the waste

Solid Waste Collection and Recycling Systems Assessment Report 16

Waste Management Technologies in Regions, Georgia

management sector GHG impact. The Division team is currently working on the 3rd national review and the most recent report is available at the following site: http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/natc/geonc2.pdf.

2.8 National and Donor Supported Initiatives Pertinent To Project Results

In recent years, there have been a number of ISWM initiatives supported by donors and multi‐ national development banks leading to improvements in SWM conditions in some local areas (including the Adjara Autonomous Republic) or that have supported the national government in the development and implementation of its new legal and planning framework. A brief description of those initiatives are shown in Annex 2. It should be noted that one of the important objectives of this initial Component 1 assessment process is to define Project activities that are consistent with and support the outcomes of the various initiatives identified in Annex 2. This is particularly the case in the Adjara region where European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) support has been active in developing a new regional landfill. Similarly, the Project will benefit greatly from the information developed in those projects as well as from the results and lessons learned from their planning and implementation activities.

3. CURRENT SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT IN THE AUTONOMOUS REPUBLIC OF ADJARA

3.1 Demographics and Regional SWM Background

The Adjara Region, with a population of about 393,700 people, is located in the southwest of Georgia and occupies approximately 3,000 km2. The Adjara Region consists of five districts (, Khelvachauri, Keda, Shuakhevi and ) and 342 settlements including 2 cities (Batumi and Kobuleti), 7 towns (, , , Kheda, Khelvachauri, Shuakhevi and Khulo), and 333 villages. Major municipalities in Adjara include Batumi, Kobuleti and Khelvachauri. General population collection service coverage in each of the districts and municipality is shown in the table presented in Annex 1 which also shows a summary of their SWM program assets and budget allocations.

3.2 Solid Waste Generation and Characteristics

Municipal Solid Waste ‐ Although there is little data on solid waste sources and generation in the Adjara region, most of the solid waste generated in the region consists of municipal solid waste derived from residents and businesses. About 78% of the Adjara’s population live in urban areas (while only about 26% of Kakheti’s population live in urban areas). The people who live in rural areas are mainly farmers who produce various agricultural products. Based on 2007 data, the MOERP estimates that the Adjara region accounts for about 11% of the total amount of solid waste generated in Georgia. Due to tourism, there is a strong seasonal variation in the amount of solid waste generated in the region particularly during the high tourist season from May to September. This seasonal variation requires the LLC responsible for collection in the Adjara region to adjust their container deployment and collection schedules to accommodate the increased amount of solid waste generated during the tourist high season.

The EBRD funded feasibility study for the new regional landfill project in Adjara projects that a population increase of approximately 2,000 people per year is expected in the region thereby establishing the basis for some of the expected increase in the amount of solid waste generated each year.

Other Major Solid Waste Sources ‐ Industrial waste is also produced in the Adjara Region but at a much smaller extent than municipal solid waste. The largest industrial plant in the Adjara Region is

Solid Waste Collection and Recycling Systems Assessment Report 17

Waste Management Technologies in Regions, Georgia

the oil refinery in Batumi and there are also food processing plants and small scale consumer goods manufacturing facilities (furniture, clothes and footwear) that contribute to the overall waste stream. For the most part, these industrial facilities currently manage their own waste streams. The Project should attempt to determine the impact of this waste on the existing municipal programs and disposal sites in the region.

3.3 Status of Solid Waste Management Services and Infrastructure

Collection and Transport ‐ Collection services in the Adjara region is provided by the Batumi municipality owned LLC (Sandasuptaveba LTD). The company is 100% owned by the municipality of Batumi and it provides regional collection services to all municipalities in Adjara. The municipalities serviced by the company (including Batumi) are subject to the annual tendering and contracting process stipulated in the Georgian state procurement law.

Sandasuptaveba LTD was formed in January, 2006 by the Adjarian Ministry of Economy following the bankruptcy of a previous company (Spectavtomerurneoba LTD) that was responsible for collection and cleansing services. In March 2006, ownership of the company was transferred to the Batumi municipality. Since then, the company services were extended to the other regional municipalities as a replacement for the previous local collection and transport services that each municipality had provided through their own associated LLC or municipal functions.

The degree of collection coverage currently provided by Sandasuptaveba LTD varies significantly from municipality to municipality. For example, 100% Batumi municipality is covered by the collection system while only about 30% of Kobuleti and 15% of Khelvachauri are served. The ability to provide expanded collection service in the regional municipalities is not due to the existing technical capacity of the company but rather due to the limited financial resources in the municipalities to pay for the expanded service. Currently, the company collects about 70,000 tons of solid waste per year and this material is transported to the two principal active disposal areas in the region.

The frequency at which containers are serviced by the company varies depending on the nature of the areas where the containers are located. For example, tourist areas in Batumi usually receive frequent service each day depending on the season while containers in remote municipalities such as Khulo will only be serviced every other day.

Theoretically, a tariff structure exists for support of the SWM services in all of the region’s municipalities. Generally different fee basis structures exist for the population and for businesses. Fees payable by businesses for the collection of solid waste are decided by the municipal councils and are typically calculated by a measurable parameter such as the square feet of a business location, seats in a theater, beds in a hospital or clinic, etc. The household fee, which is also established by the municipal councils, depends on the number of individuals in the household. The monthly fee per individual in Batumi is 0.90 Lari per person per month while the fee in in Khelvachauri is set at 0.45 Lari per person per month. There is no mechanism for enforcing the payment of the household fee and, as a result, collection rates are low throughout the region.

Recycling/Recovery – There is no formal municipally sponsored sorting of solid waste for recovery purposes throughout the Adjara region. Small scale informal recyclers recover materials from collection containers as well as at the existing disposal sites currently in use. In addition, collection service drivers, waste collectors and streets cleaners will often retrieve materials during their normal activities that can be later sold as a source of extra income. There are a number of metal and glass reception centers that will buy recovered materials and accumulate sufficient quantities for cost effective transport to manufacturing plants that can use these materials for the manufacture of new products. The status of these facilities and the markets that serve the region will be the subject of the independent Component 2 assessment process.

Disposal – There are currently two major waste disposal sites in Adjara. The main site is located in Khelvachauri near Batumi and the secondary site is located in Kobuleti. A number of smaller landfills

Solid Waste Collection and Recycling Systems Assessment Report 18

Waste Management Technologies in Regions, Georgia

in Keda, Shuakhevi and Khulu (which had been in use since 1989‐1991) were closed in 2010 and the solid waste from these municipalities is now transported to the Batumi landfill. The general characteristics of the active or recent disposal areas in Adjara are shown in the following table.

ADJARA DISPOSAL SITE ACTIVITY (2000 TO 2011) Year Year Area Location Status Waste (M3) Type Open Closed (ha) Kobuleti 2007 ‐ Operating 2 206,993 Managed Kobuleti 1960 2007 Closed 8 1,906,990 Unmanaged Keda 1991 2010 Closed 0.05 14,000 Unmanaged Shuakhevi 1990 2010 Closed ‐ 12,500 Unmanaged Khulu 1989 2010 Closed 0.45 45,000 Unmanaged Khulu (Beshumi) 2002 ‐ Operating 0.03 6,600 Unmanaged Batumi 1965 ‐ Operating 19.2 9,120,000 Managed Source: Climate Change Strategy of Adjara 2011

The main site in Batumi covers an area of about 19 ha and is located in an alluvial river bed about 10 km south of the Batumi city center. The site has been used as a disposal location for many years and there is a significant amount of solid waste accumulated at site. The landfill is located close to the River Chorokhi in a flood zone adjacent to the river. The disposal area’s lack of environmentally protective measures and poor operating conditions contribute to environmental damage including a situation where a significant amount of solid waste is washed away from the site due to periodic flooding conditions.

Current solid waste deposited at both of the existing operating dumping sites consists of about 95% household solid waste. In addition, Sandasuptaveba LTD disposes of street sweeping and beach cleaning waste at these existing disposal sites.

Key elements of the project financed by the EBRD (where the Republic of Georgia and the Autonomous Republic of Adjara will be the borrower and co‐borrower, respectively) will include the construction of a new regional landfill (which had originally been intended be located in Chakvi) and the closure of the existing noncompliant landfills. During the planning phase of the EBRD project, a site for a proposed regional landfill was identified. However, local opposition to that site resulted in a search for a new site which has now been located in the Kobuleti region. The new site is now in its design and permitting phase. The EBRD project also supported the creation of a new special purpose company (Hygiene LTD) in 2009 to design, construct and operate the new regional landfill. When the new landfill is operational, closure of the Batumi and Kobuleti disposal sites are expected to remain a function of the Government of Adjara.

In addition to the above, there are numerous informal dump sites throughout the region including in all of the villages in each municipality that are not served by the Sandasuptaveba LTD collection service. This is particularly the case in outlying municipalities such as Keda and Khulu that are located in a mountainous area of the region with many inaccessible villages.

4. CURRENT SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT IN KAKHETI REGION

There is considerable work to be done to achieve sustainable sound practice SWM standards and processes in the Kakheti region. Institutional responsibility for the operation and condition of the official municipal disposal sites has recently shifted to the national SWMCG while Kakheti municipalities retain their responsibility for MSW collection and transport.

4.1 Demographics and Regional SWM Background

The Kakheti Region, with an approximate population of 407,200 people, has an area of about 11,310

Solid Waste Collection and Recycling Systems Assessment Report 19

Waste Management Technologies in Regions, Georgia

km2. The region is comprised of nine munipalities (, , Dedoplistskaro, , , , , and ) and 276 villages. Prior to SWMCG’s takeover of the Kakheti region’s legal landfills, each of the municipalities utilized their own disposal areas. At that time, the region was served by 11 official and 1 unofficial disposal areas generally functioning as open dumps. As is the case throughout Georgia, municipal collection and cleansing services focus on the urban core and major roads of each municipality. Limited collection service coverage is provided for some nearby villages in close proximity to the urban core while other more remote or inaccessible villages are not provided with any formal collection service thereby necessitating the use of informal disposal sites in proximity to those villages. In the villages where limited collection services are provided, the frequency of servicing collection containers is generally less than that for the urban cores areas. For example, in municipalities where central urban area containers are emptied daily, villages provided with collection service may only receive service once or twice per week. Rural regions of each municipality are not provided with any collection service and, as a result, “backyard” disposal or burning is the prevalent manner by which solid waste is “managed”.

4.2 Solid Waste Generation and Characteristics

Municipal Solid Waste ‐ Although data on solid waste sources and generation rates in Kakheti region is scant, most of the solid waste generated consists of municipal and agricultural wastes. Only about 26% of the regional population live in Kakheti’s urban areas. The people who live in rural areas are primarily farmers who produce various agricultural products. Based on 2007 data, the Ministry of the Environmental and Resource Protection estimates that the Kakheti region generates about 7% of the total amount of solid waste generated in Georgia. On a local basis, there is some limited seasonal variation in the total amount of solid waste generated particularly during the grape harvesting period in September and November each year. Also, increased wine and ecological tourism may account for increasing solid waste generation in the future as the number of visitors to the region grows and collection service coverage is increased.

Other Major Solid Waste Sources – Some industrial waste is produced in Kakheti but at a much smaller extent than the generation of municipal and agricultural solid waste. In Kakheti, the main industrial activity is food production and, particularly, wine‐making (which represents about 75% of the food production industry in the region). Oil extraction waste in the municipalities of Sagarejo and Dedoplistskaro and timber processing in Akhmeta also contribute to waste generation. Waste management by these sources is primarily handled by the generators. The Project will need to determine the manner in which this waste is managed to determine its potential impact on the municipal SWM programs and the development of the solid waste management plans for the municipalities which is a recommended focus of the Project in the Kakheti region.

4.3 Status of Solid Waste Management Services and Infrastructure

Collection and Transport ‐ In the Kakheti region, solid waste collection is also accomplished, for the most part, through a primary/secondary container‐based collection process. The technical assets available for solid waste management services varies from municipality to municipality as shown in the Table below. In some municipalities, investments have been made in modern specialized solid waste collection trucks and containers. However, some municipalities still utilize outmoded tipper trucks requiring manual loading of solid waste from deployed containers. In many cases, the collection service vehicles in these municipalities are being used well beyond their normal expected useful life which affects both maintenance/repair costs and collection program reliability.

The collection services in the Kakheti region are commonly provided by municipally owned limited liability companies that (unlike Adjara) are individual to each municipality. These LLC companies are selected annually through the Georgian Procurement Law mandated annual tender process and financed, for the most part, from the individual municipal budgets. Because of the procurement process, competition for the service delivery during each annual tender process is basically non‐

Solid Waste Collection and Recycling Systems Assessment Report 20

Waste Management Technologies in Regions, Georgia

existent.

As is the case in the Adjara region, a tariff structure exists in most of the Kakheti municipalities. For example, in the villages of Samreklo and Khornabuji in the Dedoplistskaro District, the solid waste fee is set at 0.50 Tetri/person/month and in the rest of the villages in that district – 0.30 Tetri. In Signagi District, the solid waste fee is 40 Tetri/person/month. In Akhmeta District of Kakheti, waste fee for is 20 Tetri/person/month and for organizations 15 Lari/m3. Certain social groups are typically exempt from the waste fee such as war veterans, single mothers and their children, visually impaired persons, low‐income families. In all assessment field work interviews with Kakheti region local officials, they stated that the actual collection rate of the residential tariff fees was extremely low and that there was not mechanism (and possibly political will) for collection enforcement. General population collection service coverage in each of the districts and municipality is shown in the table presented in Annex 1 which also shows a summary of their SWM program assets and budget allocations.

Recycling/Recovery – The assessment team was unable to identify any formal municipally sponsored recycling or composting programs in the Kakheti region. Despite the fact that both target regions produce a significant amount of agricultural waste, central composting facilities do not exist. In addition, minimal informal recycling was noted within the collection systems or at disposal areas currently in use. Anecdotal information provided by various Kakheti region municipal officials indicated that, prior to the SWMCG’s assumption of responsibility for the official disposal areas, there were limited informal recycling activities at the municipal disposal areas. However, improvements by the SWMCG at the existing disposal sites including fencing and full‐time staffing has generally eliminated the informal recycling process at the disposal areas that are in their control.

In the municipalities throughout the Kakheti region, scrap metal depots were observed that purchase various metal materials from generators or informal recyclers. These depots serve as consolidation points for accumulation of sufficient material to ship to available markets in the Adjara region or Turkey. Reuse practices take place in Georgia, however, they are primarily dictated by hard economic situations rather than environmental or SWM considerations.

Disposal ‐ In the past couple of years, the SWMCG has assumed ownership and operation of the legal disposal sites in the Kakheti region. Improvements have been made or are pending in these disposal areas. Generally, sites have been fenced and a full time attendant has been provided to control access and log waste receipt. In some cases, site grading and accumulated waste consolidation has occurred followed by application of cover material. Further, some disposal areas have been closed and solid waste from some municipality is being trucked to a disposal area in another municipality. For example, solid waste from the municipality of Akhmeta is now being transported to the disposal site in Telavi by the LLC providing collection services for Akhmeta.

Currently, a study is underway by the SWMCG to determine a location for a new regional landfill in the region which will be established to E.U. standards. The SWMCG has indicated that, once this site has been identified and secured, consideration will also be given to developing a network of transfer stations that may be necessary to reduce the cost of transportation for some of the Kakheti municipalities.

5. TECHNICAL/PLANNING/ECONOMIC/MANAGEMENT GAPS AND NEEDS SUMMARY

Through the assessment process, gaps and weaknesses were identified in each target region’s SWM programs and the institutions responsible for them. These gaps and weaknesses must serve as the basis for structuring the assistance to be provided through the Project. Project activities should also be defined by an existing lack of good quality information that will be necessary to make informed decisions on how to enhance SWM sector performance. Further, the existing gaps and needs to be

Solid Waste Collection and Recycling Systems Assessment Report 21

Waste Management Technologies in Regions, Georgia

addressed for the Project are also defined by the availability of financial resources required to establish the desired ISWM level of service and coverage throughout the target regions. Generally, some of the identified gaps and weak points may begin to be addressed upon the final enactment of the new waste code and development of a national ISWM strategy and action plan. Currently, however, insufficient data exists concerning the amount and composition of municipal solid waste generated in the target regions and a fundamental objective of the Project should be to establish the means for developing sufficient relevant information for effective planning and decision making. For example, effective municipal planning has to include the means for making accurate solid waste generation projections that are a prerequisite for making informed decisions concerning the required collection and transport assets that will be required to meet future service as the population (and resulting solid waste management flow) increases in each of the target regions. Accurate data will also be very important in developing new ISWM infrastructure aimed at materials recovery.

Based on the assessment field work and interviews conducted in each of the target regions, a number of data, capacity and training gaps were identified and are summarized in the following table. In addition to identifying these gaps, the table also presents the recommended Project means for addressing them as well as a listing of the specific expertise that may be provided by ICMA members throughout the term of the Project.

Solid Waste Collection and Recycling Systems Assessment Report 22

Waste Management Technologies in Regions, Georgia

GAP AND NEEDS CAPACITY BUILDING AND ICMA MEMBERBSHIP DEFICIENCIES AND ISSUES ELEMENT TRAINING VEHICLE ASSSISTANCE FOCUS Institutional Issues  Lack of clarity on future national and local institutional  Interactive work with  Solid waste planning roles Project to develop SWM  Improving collection plans service effectiveness  Lack of communication and coordinated planning  Workshop on SWM Plan between national institutions and municipalities Development  Weak local institutional capacity to make informed decision Regulation and  Lack of an effective legal framework and specific  National Government Enforcement regulations pertaining to all aspects of future ISWM actions to enforce new programs regulations

 Lack of a sufficient enforcement mechanism Technical and  Limited collection service coverage  Interactive work with  Collection service Operational Project to develop SWM optimization and  Existing substandard official disposal facilities that plans expansion remain in use  Training on service  Remediation plan  Prevalent informal random dumps in areas not covered expansion and dump area preparation and by formal collection programs closure implementation support Waste Hierarchy  Lack of formal government sponsored recovery  Workshop on waste  Recycling program Compliance programs (recycling and composting) recovery programs and development and facilities including recycling operations  Lack of public awareness of recycling and composting and composting  Green waste composting opportunities  Market development for recyclables and compost (Component 2 actions)  Public awareness focus on recycling and composting

Solid Waste Collection and Recycling Systems Assessment Report 18

Waste Management Technologies in Regions, Georgia

GAP AND NEEDS CAPACITY BUILDING AND ICMA MEMBERBSHIP DEFICIENCIES AND ISSUES ELEMENT TRAINING VEHICLE ASSSISTANCE FOCUS Financial and  Inconsistent and non‐functioning tariff fee structures  Training on Full Cost  Full cost accounting Economic where collected fees do not come near to covering Accounting for service  Making effective capital actual costs delivery (municipalities and expenditure decisions LLCs)  Financial analysis  Poor collection rates for residential tariff fees  Interactive work with LLCs  Lack of political will to pursue fee collection or increase to develop effective tariff levels business plans and means for effective service delivery and management Waste Related  Lack of data on waste generation quantities and  Training on means of  Environmental effects of Data composition deriving SWM data for SWM effective planning  GHG mitigation planning  Lack of data on environmental and health effects of  Workshop on the related to SWM current SWM practices and facilities Environmental effects of  Waste data collection SWM with emphasis on and reporting GHG effects  Public awareness and education focus on environmental consequences of improper SWM  Basic training on data collection and reporting Strategic  Lack of a national ISWM strategy affecting local and  Interactive work with  SWM Planning and regional provision of ISWM services Project to develop SWM implementation plans for Kakheti  Lack of technical/financial/management capacity at the municipalities local level to develop comprehensive and effective local  Workshop on SWM Plan SWM plans Development

Solid Waste Collection and Recycling Systems Assessment Report 19

Waste Management Technologies in Regions, Georgia

GAP AND NEEDS CAPACITY BUILDING AND ICMA MEMBERBSHIP DEFICIENCIES AND ISSUES ELEMENT TRAINING VEHICLE ASSSISTANCE FOCUS  Municipal performance monitoring functions Awareness and  Lack of public awareness of health and environmental  Full scale public awareness  Public awareness Education related issues associated with poor sector performance campaign including need program development and facilities for cost recovery (See and delivery Project Component 4)  Lack of public awareness of the benefits of effective services and facilities including the mitigation of the environmental impact of GHG emissions and groundwater and surface water contamination associated with existing SWM practices and facilities

 Lack of preparedness for tariff reform that may be required due to increasing costs for effective services and facilities Private Sector  Georgian Procurement Law requirements that prevent  Interactive work with  Contract performance Competiveness competition for SWM sector services and greater Kakheti LLCs to develop conditions and private sector involvement effective operations based monitoring processes on the assumption that  Existing legal barriers requiring the redefinition of they will provide services “waste” as “goods” for the purpose of adding value for foreseeable future from currently zero to some price for purchasing waste  Interactive work with as a commodity. Otherwise, waste is prohibited from Adjara municipalities on purchase which excludes waste from the manufacturing optimizing and source value chain. standardizing the tender and contracting process

Solid Waste Collection and Recycling Systems Assessment Report 20

Waste Management Technologies in Regions, Georgia

6. PROJECT ACTIVITY RECOMMENDATIONS AND ACTION PLANS

6.1 Recommended Focus of Planning Assistance

Based on assessment observations and findings related to the existing SWM situations in the target regions, the following are recommended focus areas for Project assistance activities. Preliminary actions plans for proposed assistance sub‐activities for the coming year are presented in Annex 2.

Kakheti Region ‐ The individual relationships that exist between Kakheti municipalities and their LLC operating companies presents a classic and holistic SWM planning and development approach to solid waste management at the local level with some development elements that extend to the regional and, possibly, national context. Due to the existing national procurement law concerning the tender and contracting process for the LLCs, it is difficult to envision that there will be significant competition for the existing LLCs in the near term. A scenario similar to that in Adjara where the Batumi LLC provides regional services to all of the municipalities in the region is not likely in Kakheti given the relative size of the municipalities and the geographical distances between them. Accordingly, the existing LLCs should be considered as having a longer term relationship with the municipalities than the 1 year contract limit required by the national procurement law.

Accordingly, the recommended assistance should focus on assisting the Kakheti municipalities and their respective LLCs in developing municipal solid waste management plans based on an anticipated local requirement for such plans in the pending legal framework and national strategy requirements. The new code is expected to include a local requirement for incorporating recycling, recovery, and composting processes as a means for diverting solid waste components from landfill disposal as is currently mandated in E.U. SWM programs. The context for the municipal solid waste management plans will be the anticipated requirements as currently stipulated in the working draft of the new solid waste law which states the following relative to the required content of the municipal solid waste management plans:

Article 13 Municipal Waste Management Plan

(1) Each municipality shall adopt a plan for the management of the municipal waste produced within its territory for a period of five years. A Municipal Waste Management Plan may be prepared jointly by neighbouring municipalities. The Municipal Waste Management Plan shall be compliant with the National Waste Management Plan and other plans under Article 12 paragraph 7 of this Law.

(2) The adoption of the Municipal Waste Management Plan shall be preceded by public consultations, involving the relevant stakeholders and the neighbouring municipalities. These public consultations shall be carried out by the respective municipality(ies).

(3) The Municipal Waste Management Plan shall contain the following:

a) Information on the existing system for collection of waste from population;

b) Data on the types and the amounts of non‐hazardous waste from population collected, recovered and disposed of;

c) Data on the types and the amounts of hazardous waste from population collected, recovered and disposed of;

d) Location of the waste treatment facilities;

e) Planned measures to be taken for the establishment of separate collection and recovery of municipal waste, including of biodegradable waste and packaging waste;

Solid Waste Collection and Recycling Systems Assessment Report 21

Waste Management Technologies in Regions, Georgia

f) Planned construction of new waste treatment facilities;

g) Programmes to raise awareness of the public on waste management issues;

h) Implemented and planned measures for co‐operation with other municipalities in the field of waste management;

i) The way and timeframe in which the proposed measures shall be implemented, responsible persons, estimated costs and sources of financing for their implementation.

These expected requirements should be the template for assistance provided to the Kakheti municipalities in developing their plans. If these requirements are changed in the final enactment of the law, the municipal ISWM plan development process should be modified accordingly. Specific activities that will be important considerations of working with the municipalities to develop the recommended municipal solid waste management plans will, at a minimum, include the following:

 Increasing the institution capacity of the municipalities to manage the contractual relationship with their LLC companies and to increase their financial capacity to make appropriate decisions concerning service budgeting, system coverage expansion and periodic capital investments.

 Optimizing solid waste companies (but treating them somewhat as a municipal function due to the tender process which almost assures their continuity in providing collection and cleansing services) including defining the means for achieving service coverage expansion in conjunction with capital investment decisions by the municipalities.

 Informal dump closure and remediation, if necessary (assumed to be treated as municipal function in the finally adopted national law and strategy).

 Defining the amount and type of solid waste that must be managed by the municipal system.

 Defining the type, amount and current disposal or recovery practices of other waste stream components (industry, agribusiness, etc.) that exist in the region and that may be subject to the requirements of the new law and national strategy.

 Sorting plant (or other recovery process) economic/technical viability assessment and design (to determine how such plants (or any other means for achieving the new law diversion objectives) can become viable cost effective component of a municipality’s solid waste management plan)

Adjara Autonomous Republic ‐ Because of the regional aspects of the SWM collection program in Adjara and the level of development supported by the EBRD in their project due diligence, planning and implementation process, the Project’s assistance activities in Adjara should be focused on selectively supporting specific stakeholders on specific issues of concern. Project assistance activity focus areas should include the following:

 Municipal capacity building in: 1) the collection service tender/contract and collection performance monitoring processes and 2) the collection service coverage expansion planning and implementation process. (This is intended to give the Adjara municipalities (outside of Batumi) an enhanced voice in collection/transport service delivery and coverage while helping them understand the pros and cons of regional collection/transport program versus locally‐ based services.

 Recycling and recovery realities and private sector business plans to enhance market conditions for future public sponsored recovery programs (As the key element of Component 2 of the Project, this should be done in conjunction with capacity building in the municipalities to understand the technical, business and economic aspects of the “sorting plants” that they have all expressed an interest in developing in their municipalities)

 Landfill technical and operational capacity building and operational planning with the Hygiene

Solid Waste Collection and Recycling Systems Assessment Report 22

Waste Management Technologies in Regions, Georgia

LTD state company at the time when the new regional landfill is about to come into operation

Both Regions ‐ The following are recommended Project activity focus areas that are anticipated to apply to both target regions (and may also have national applicability):

 Tariff Reform and Cost Recovery – While this is the important function of Component 3 of the Project, the need for effective optimized cost recovery will need to be emphasized as a key element of developing the proposed municipal solid waste management plans in the Kakheti municipalities. In developing their SWM plans, the Kakheti municipalities will begin to understand the economic impact of enhanced SWM standards and programs with tariff reform and resulting enhanced cost recovery as a key objective of implementing their SWM plans.

 Public Outreach and Education ‐ While this is the important function of Component 4 of the Project, the development of the municipal ISWM plans in the Kakheti region must also focus on the need and means for public understanding of 1) the future roles that waste generators in an enhanced ISWM system may have in the future particularly as it relates to an increased emphasis on recycling/recovery processes, 2) the evolution of waste generator willingness to pay for better services based on environmental improvements (Unfortunately, willingness to pay for effective environmentally sound landfills (which few people physically see) is often different from a willingness to pay for better collection service which everybody sees in their daily lives.) This will need to be resolved in the Project design of its Public Awareness elements as they relate to the above regional activities in addition to the general public awareness objectives associated with the overall solid waste management process.)

 Closure requirements and processes ‐ Capacity building for the SWMCG in Kakheti and Hygiene LTD in Adjara for closure of currently active disposal areas when regional E.U. standard landfills become available in each target region.

 Closure requirements and processes ‐ Capacity building for closure and rehabilitation of the informal dumping sites in municipal areas where formal collection is now provided now or in the future through coverage expansion.

The specific recommendations resulting from this assessment process are based on the above observations and recommended focus areas and are organized in accordance with the context of the individual target elements of the Component 1 Implementation Plan which includes the following general activity categories:

Target 1.1 ‐ Create the Adjara and Kakheti Stakeholder Consultative Group (Done)

Target 1.2 ‐ Assess solid waste management in Kakheti and Adjara (The function of this assessment report)

Target 1.3 ‐ Conduct a preliminary environmental assessment and GHG assessment in Kakheti and Adjara (To be completed in another baseline assessment the near future by another SSTA)

Target 1.4 ‐ Design region‐specific ISWM strategies and action plans

Target 1.5 ‐ Conduct capacity and training gap analysis of municipalities and SWM companies

Target 1.6 ‐ Provide tailored assistance, and training to municipalities and SWM companies

Target 1.7 ‐ Assist waste collection companies in developing and implementing business plans that will improve the admin., management, collection, efficient transportation, separation, sorting and disposal of wastes, and increase the supply of recyclable materials to recycling companies

Target 1.8 ‐ Design and implement a city‐to‐city exchange program

Target 1.9 ‐ Implement pilots via partial grant to assist recycling companies to produce special bins for

Solid Waste Collection and Recycling Systems Assessment Report 23

Waste Management Technologies in Regions, Georgia

recyclable materials and distribute in selected municipalities, including national parks Target 1.10 ‐ Support the implementation of small‐scale composting activities

Target 1.11 ‐ Develop landfill remediation/closure plans

Specific recommendations applicable to Implementation Plan target accomplishments 1.4 to 1.11 as listed above follow.

6.2 Target 1.4 ‐ Design region‐specific ISWM strategies and action plans

SWM institutional arrangements and conditions in Kakheti are different than those in Adjara where the Batumi owned LLC provides collection and transport services to all of the other municipalities in the region. In addition, the development of the proposed regional landfill through EBRD minimizes the direct involvement that the Adjara municipalities outside Batumi will have in directly delivering necessary related ISWM services. In the Kakheti region where each municipality is responsible for their individual LLC service providers, there is more direct local responsibility for service provision thereby placing more of the responsibility for service delivery on the municipalities.

Recommendation 1 – The Project should directly work with the municipalities in the Kakheti region to assist them in developing comprehensive local solid waste management plans that are expected to be required by the pending waste law and national strategy when adopted. The process of developing these local SWM plans will provide significant training and capacity building opportunities on all aspects of the required local plan elements.

Recommendation 2 – The Project should provide training to the Kakheti municipalities consistent with the criteria for ISWM training elements presented in Annex 4. Appropriate curriculum and workshops should be organized to instruct Kakheti municipalities in the development of their local SWM plans (based on the proposed SWM Plan content stipulated in the current draft of the proposed National Code) and making informed decisions regarding SWM processes and new facilities in the future.

Recommendation 3 – The Project should provide targeted training to the Adjara municipalities on management and supervision of the tender and contracting process as it defines their ongoing relationship with the Batumi owned LLC providing regional collection services with the intent of providing a common basis for the tender and contract process and increasing their voice in their collection and cleansing service provision and coverage expansion.

Recommendation 4 – The Project should provide targeted assistance to the SWMCG related to the proposed regional landfill in Kakheti and to Hygiene LTD related to the proposed regional landfill in Adjara on operations and maintenance and the development of detailed operating plans. This training should be provided at a time prior to the planned startup of the new landfill sites in each region.

Recommendation 5 – The Project should develop and secure a cooperative agreement or memorandum of understanding with all target stakeholders for whom Project assistance will be provided. At a minimum, the agreement should define the individual responsibilities of the Project and stakeholders in achieving the intended objectives of the Project assistance.

Recommendation 6 – In all of its activities, the Project should cooperating closely coordinate its actions with the donors and multinational banks active in the SWM sector in Georgia. This coordination is warranted by the fact that some of the Projects recommended activities (such as assisting the future landfill operators for new regional landfills in developing operations and maintenance plans) will be a function of the progress made in developing such facilities.

Solid Waste Collection and Recycling Systems Assessment Report 24

Waste Management Technologies in Regions, Georgia

6.3 Target 1.5 ‐ Conduct capacity and training gap analysis of municipalities and SW companies

Expansion of collection service delivery is an important concern for most of the municipalities in each target region. Increased collection coverage is apt to be an important element of local ISWM plans that will, most likely, be required when the new Georgian waste code is enacted. In addition, a new emphasis of waste component diversion from landfill disposal will require increase municipal capacity on the technical and economical means of recycling and composting waste stream materials and utilizing them in cost effective recovery programs whether implemented locally or through regional processing facility and systems.

Recommendation 7 ‐ The Project should complete a detailed individual assessment of all municipal and LLC functions (accounting, management, monitoring, etc.) related to the provision of SWM related services. In the Kakheti region, this will be an important initial process associated with the development of the proposed local SWM plans.

Recommendation 8 ‐ As a basis for the preparation of the local municipal SWM plans, the Project should identify the individual training and capacity building elements that will required for the specific municipal functions that will be important in the implementation of the SWM plans including, at a minimum, municipal budgeting, service monitoring, and environmental compliance processes.

6.4 Target 1.6 ‐ Provide tailored assistance, and training to municipalities and SWM companies

The SWM and institutional situation in each of the target regions is different. In Adjara, a regional collection/ transport program provides service to the region’s municipalities through the Batumi LLC. In addition, through the support of the EBRD, planning and implementation processes for the new proposed regional landfill is further advanced than that in Kakheti. In addition, the initial reticence of management of the Batumi LLC to the intent and availability of assistance from the Project may be an impediment to providing assistance to Sandasuptaveba LTD. Accordingly, a different strategic approach to Project activities is warranted for each region.

Recommendation 9 – In assisting the Kakheti municipalities to develop their comprehensive local solid waste management plans, training should be provided in all elements pertaining to the probable requirements of the pending waste code regarding stipulated municipal SWM plans and the probable responsibilities that the municipalities will have or retain under the new legal framework.

Recommendation 10 ‐ In the Adjara region, assistance should be provided to the regional municipalities on specific issues including the management of the tendering contracting process with the Batumi LLC and a process for identifying and implementing the means for service expansion to currently unserved or underserved locales within each municipality.

Solid Waste Collection and Recycling Systems Assessment Report 25

Waste Management Technologies in Regions, Georgia

6.5 Target 1.7 ‐ Assist waste collection companies in developing and implementing business plans that will improve the admin., management, collection, efficient transportation, separation, sorting and disposal of wastes, and increase the supply of recyclable materials to recycling companies

The current procurement law requirements in Georgia generally preclude competition for the municipal LLCs. This minimizes the sustainability risk of providing assistance to a company that only has a 1 year contract to provide its services.

Recommendation 11 – Subject to any change in the national procurement law that would alter the tender/contracting relationship between the municipalities and LLCs in Kakheti, the Project should help the Kakheti LLCs improve their management capabilities and service delivery. This should be done in a manner that closely correlates with activities related to the development of the municipal SWM plans. Initially, this assistance should be provided with the assumption that the LLCs have a business life extending beyond the one year contract term stipulated in the existing national procurement law.

6.6 Target 1.8 ‐ Design and implement a city‐to‐city exchange program

One of the major benefits of the ICMA program is the ability to provide peer to peer matching to assist in the development of effective ISWM services and facilities. However, for this assistance to be meaningful, it must be provided within the context of prevailing SWM practices in Georgia. For example, the use of a technical basis of a container based collection program differs significantly from the approach utilized in the U.S. As a result, ICMA peer representatives from the E.U. may provide more relevant experience. U.S. peer representatives may be relevant to generic SWM processes such as development and administration of collection fleet maintenance programs service tendering and contracting processes along with service monitoring and supervision

Recommendation 12 – During the detailed assessment phase with each municipality, the Project should identify specific categories of tasks where ICMA peer to peer assistance can be provided in both Kakheti and Adjara during the terms of the Project. In doing this, the Project should clearly match peers with knowledge and experience related to the type of collection processes and municipal functions utilized in Georgia and the requirements and experience of processing and disposal processes commonly practiced in the European Union.

6.7 Target 1.9 ‐ Implement pilots via partial grant to assist recycling companies to produce special bins for recyclable materials and distribute in selected municipalities, including national parks

This activity will be closely related to the prospects of Component 2 which will seek to increase market strength for recyclables and compost materials. Accordingly, the activity may be focused on locations where local markets for recovered materials exist both in Adjara and Kakheti.

Recommendation 13 – During the detailed assessment process in each municipality, the Project should identify a village area without collection service in one of the municipalities in the Kakheti region where a community based SWM pilot program can be implemented including small scale organic waste compost elements that can be implemented such as backyard composting. Other pilot processes in the target village should include recycling and microenterprise collection service provision.

6.8 Target 1.10 ‐ Support the implementation of small‐scale composting activities

Solid Waste Collection and Recycling Systems Assessment Report 26

Waste Management Technologies in Regions, Georgia Increased collection service coverage may not be practical for all remote villages in municipalities in both Kakheti and Adjara. Accordingly, the development of a community based model that may be practical for remote inaccessible villages may include the use of backyard composting for residential organics thereby reducing the amount of material placed in the community’s informal dumping site.

Recommendation 14 ‐ in addition to the small scale composting elements of the village‐based pilot program defined in Recommendation 13, each municipality in the target regions should be helped to develop green waste composting programs aimed at reducing the materials transported to the disposal sites. Where possible, these composting programs should be combined with the processing of compostable materials from markets and small scale agribusiness sources.

Recommendation 15 ‐ in completing the detailed assessments of all municipalities in each target region, the Project should identify all sources of potentially compostable material including waste derived from wineries, markets, agribusinesses, or any other source that can provide select organics for creation of high‐quality compost. This should include both the possibility of combining materials from the sources in a municipal green waste composting program or providing information to the sources on the benefits of composting their materials and, possibly, using the developed compost for their internal purposes or for sale.

Recommendation 16 ‐ As a key planning element, the Project should develop a detailed compost marketing summary for each target region including: 1) the identification of existing markets for compost derived from source separated materials and for compost derived from mixed waste processing, 2) the development of standard specifications for compost derived from source separated organic materials and from processing of mixed MSW. (This summary will be an important element of evaluating compost applications in the development of the ISWM plan in the municipalities in the target regions.)

6.9 Target 1.11 ‐ Develop landfill remediation/closure plans

Once new E.U. standard regional landfills have been implemented in the Kakheti region by the national SWMCG and in the Adjara Autonomous Republic by the government through EBRD financial support, formal closure activities will be required for all active major disposal areas currently in use in each region. These formal closure processes will be the responsibility of the SWMCG in Kakheti and the Government of Adjara in that region. In addition, enhanced environmental standards imposed as a result of the pending new waste management code may require action in closing and, possibly remediating the many informal dumps located in each region. The responsibility for these informal dump closures may rest with the municipalities.

Recommendation 17 ‐ As a key planning element, the Project should create a database and map showing all informal dumps in each of municipalities and target regions. This inventory should be correlated with the information developed by the Green Movement in Georgia.

Recommendation 18 ‐ In assisting the Kakheti municipalities in developing their SWM plans, a plan element relative to closing and or remediating informal dumpsites within their jurisdiction should be developed including an assessment of economic and technical resources that will be required to accomplish the informal dump closure cleanup plan.

Solid Waste Collection and Recycling Systems Assessment Report 27

Waste Management Technologies in Regions, Georgia

ANNEX 1

KAKHETI AND ADJARA SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM DATA SUMMARIES

The following tables presents general information related to existing municipal solid waste programs based on information submitted by the municipalities. Data from some of the municipalities in each region not yet received.

Solid Waste Collection and Recycling Systems Assessment Report 28

Waste Management Technologies in Regions, Georgia

KAKHETI REGION MUNICIPAL DEMOGRAPHICS AND SWM COLLECTION SYSTEM BASICS Population Collection and Cleansing Assets Municipality Observations Total Covered Unser ved Villages Current Disposal Site Trucks Containers Staff Telavi municipa lity, MMZ‐45021, 21m 3 , 6 108 metal container, 14 perso ns in wa ste Annual amount of collected wa ste co Telavi‐Ikalto, Telavi‐ units; 1,100 Liters collection, nsists of 7,700 t. On average per day Akuri an d Telavi‐ 16 plastics conta iner 22 – in wa ste lan dfill receives 20 to 25 t of MSW. MERCEDES‐BENZ Laliskuri Highway 3 , 2 Telavi 72,800 22,000 1 official lan dfill 5.5 ha transportation, corrid or served. The units;SPRINTER, 11 m 4 – in landfill 3 rest is unserved DAF, 22 m operation (1 chief operato r, three on duty operators) Closed landfills located in Gurjaani city, Special truck 13 m3, 110 metal containers, 42 perso n s are 125 m 3 of waste collected each day and Kajreti village, Chala u bani village (2.5 ha). 1 unit 1,100 Liter; involved in clea ning disp osed to la ndfills, 3 Since 2014 Active la ndfill in Tsno ri 10 u n Specia l truck 8m3, 1 44 metal containers, and waste average collected mo nthly 3,500 m official landfills in the following villages: unit 500 liter collection, 10 ‐ in Gurjaani 70, 000 Wh ole population Vachna dzia ni, Ka lauri, Tipper truck 8 m3 , 8 waste Shashiaani, Vazisubani, Mukuza ni, units transportation Zegaa ni, Akhasheni, Velistsikhe, Chumla ki an d Ara shenda. Closed lan dfill City Kvareli, near river Special truck, 2 unit; 65 metal containers, 11 peo ple in wa ste Average collected each day ‐ 20 m 3 ; Duruji, 25,570 m2, amou nt of waste Tipper truck GAZ53, 1,100 Liter; collection, Accu mulated at landfill approximately 3 Entire population of 200,000m3; No u nofficial la ndfills; 3 units 50 metal containers, 5 ‐ in waste 200,000 m Kvareli 50,000 mu nicipality and 14 Operating la ndfills are located in the 600 Liter transportation, villages follo wing villages: Akhalsopeli, Chikaani, 21‐ in street Sabue, Shakriani, they are located clea ning, outside the villages 1 at landfill 22,000 1 city‐ Operating la ndfill located in 3 km from Ford‐Ca rgo 2524, 1 114 unit Metal (with In wa ste ma Wa ste collected and disposed on landfill ‐ 3; 3 32,443 Dedoplist ska ro, 7 city Ded oplistksaro in No rth‐Ea st, 5 ha unit, 15 m GAZ 33‐ cover and wheel) co nagement are about 2,300 m per mo nth; Wa ste co mpo 3; In total in mu villages: Sa mreklo, 07 2524 tripper, 2 ntainers, 1m 258 involved: 6 drivers; 2 sition ‐ 80% household waste, leaves, grass 3 nicipality consists of Khornabuji, Ga units, 8 m unit, metal (open) chine‐operators; ‐ 10%, Other10% ‐ Dedoplistskaro 9 villages 3 ma 1 city and 16 v illages marjveba, Ozaani, containers, 0.6m 15 workers, loaders; Arb oshiki, Mirzani sweepers, ‐ 20 and Zemo Ma chkhaani Old clo sed or partially clo sed landfills ISUZU NPR, 65m3, 3 476 metal containers, 28 perso ns are 70 % of territory: Akhmeta, Dziba khevi, located in Akhmeta city, villages Jokolo, units; 700 liter involved in waste Birkiani, Jokolo, Duisi, Sako biani, Matani, Zemo Alvani, Kvemo Alvani, Zemo Kh o SAZ‐53, 4m3, 1 unit collection, 12 in Zemo Alvani, Qvemo Alvani, Ma ghrani, 30% of villages not Akmeta 39,878 38, 088 dasheni, Kistauri 3 ha Argokhi, Pitchkh ovani, Alaverdi, Koghoto, transportation served Ojio, Atskuri, Zemo Khoda sheni, Akhshaani, Chabinaani, Arashenda, Kistau ri Akhalsheni about Pa rtially closed la ndfill in City Sagarejo 3 Trippers, 6 units GAZ 400 unit, metal 20 ‐25 perso ns are Geografically the service covers Sagarejo ha; Operating landfill in city Sa garejo 53, 2 units FORD conta iners involved in waste and 2 villages (Ni notsmidna and Sagarejo 64, 623 21,600 43,023 200,000m2; No un official landfills Tra nzit (trip per), 2 collection, 6 wa ste Giorgismidna) 3 units, 4‐5 m in tra nsportation Legal lan dfill is located near Alaza ni river Ford Cargo, 1 unit, 35 Unit, plastic In city Sighnaghi in Cities Sighanghi an d Tsno ri, territory alo 18, 650 (City Sigh an d is also used by Gurjaani 16m3; Specia l ca r containers, with wh waste ma nagement ng Bo de Monastery, “Qedeli” naghi ‐ 2,500, municipality. “ISUZU”, covered eels, 120 liter; 60 are involved 2 settlement, villages Sako b o, Ma shnaari, Tibaani 550, City one; Trip per, 1 unit, unit, meta l drivers, 5 workers, Anagi, Vakiri, Bod biskhevi, Jugaani, Tsn o ri 6,400, 8m3 containers; 9 unit, 18 sweepers; Tibaani, Iliatsminda, Nurkani –centra l Jigaani – 800, Anga ‐ metal conta iner districts of these villages are covered by 200, Kvemo Bodme 1.2m3; 11 unit, service. In city Tsn ori in waste ma na Signagi 43,569 24,919 3 – 2,000, Vakiri‐ 150, decorative bins, 0.2m gement are involved 1 driver, 3 wo rkers, Nukria ni – 1,000, 7 yardkeeprs; Sako bo ‐3,000, Iliatsmin da ‐ 1,000, Ma sh naa ri‐ 50, Bod biskhevi ‐1,000)

63 villages in the In Lagodekhi city ‐ nea r rivers La godekhi GAZ‐52 (3 m3) ‐ 2 100 unit of 240 liter 5 drivers, 12 loaders City Lago dekhi, villages Shro ma‐ Kavshiri, municipa lity ‐ only 5 gorge an d Sro m gorge units; GAZ‐53 (4 m3) plastic containers / waste collectors Afeni and villages located nearby are Lagodkhei 52,100 10,810 to 7 are served ‐ 3 units; covered by the service. An d waste is collected 5 times per week. Per month 3 29 about 130‐140 m waste is collected Tsnori

Solid Waste Collection and Recycling Systems Assessment Report 29

Waste Management Technologies in Regions, Georgia

KAKHETI REGION MUNICIPAL SWM ECONOM I C BASICS

Cl eansi ng Servi ce Budgets (Gel) Tariffs Municipality 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Popul a ti on Businesses O.Sper person shoulcnoteJaed Tela\i '99/B ) 372,300 2.51,100 348,900 365,000 2S GEL per n' r month Rnanaut iu:mah Flnancwtthmnah Gur)aanl 299,200 243,100 350.000 340.000 396,000 localbud• t localbudlllt

Thorolo no tillrlff Fororpnl urtlono

on wast :allec:fon tarff Ia determined KVarell 130,000 176,000 In KYararorll throu&hd irect lndlflduals l•reene nts O.SOper personIn Salnll:ulodecrae

Oedopllstslca'o and Nta, CB.04.ZCD

VlllapsSamreldo, detannlnes rae for Dedopllaklro 99,211 261,850 !C3,789 383,340 IChornabuJI; 0.30 lepl entltf• per81'801 -In nth1rvllhllflll Akhmeta Mu11dpelltydecree eta N34,determ ines fael'or lep l endtles 0.20GElper Sapre)o permn Mu11dpallty fsapre)o 2149,767 297,200 345,800 381,400 1,160.622 DaaeeN6 detannlnes rae for lleal entltf• OAOG::Lper Salntl:ulldecrM penon from2007

to,22141:udpt; detannlnedwaite fsl81aal B,314actual blrrr r:.r*t l endtles • 2.5 OEL Iperm= Lagodkhel O.SOper person Salnll:ulldecree

Solid Waste Collection and Recycling Systems Assessment Report 30

Waste Management Technologies in Regions, Georgia

ADJARA REGION MUNICIPAL DEMOGRAPHICSAND SWM COLLECTION SYSTEMBASICS Population Collection and Cleansing Assets Municipality Observations Total Covered Unserved Villages Current Landfills Trucks Containers Staff Operating landfill located in 3 km Ford‐Cargo 2524, 1 114 unit Metal (with In waste Waste collected and disposed on from city Dedoplistksaro in North‐ unit, 15 m3; GAZ 33‐ cover and wheel) management are landfill 2,200‐2,300 m3 per month; East, 5 ha 07 2524 tripper, 2 containers, 1m3; 258 involved: 6 Drivers; Waste composition – 80% household 3 Dedoplistskaro 32,443 22,000 9 villages units, 8 m unit, metal (open) 2 machine‐ waste, Leaves, grass – 10%, different 3 operators; 15 containers, 0.6m type – 10% workers, loaders; yard keepers, ‐ 20 Located in Lekiani Settlement on 2.5 FORD Cargo with Total 1200 metal 101 (80 labor The following areas are covered by ha, with about 300,000 m3 of waste container ‐ 31 m3, containers 1.1 m3 ‐ drivers‐ 7, loaders ‐ service: Kobuleti, Khala, Chaisubani, , Unserved towns accumulated on site. Site has no 2; ISUZI 16 m3, 1; 90; metal container 11, 3 on landfill Tsikhisdziri, Bobokvati, Kvirike, Gvara, , 3 Atchyvistavi, Tskavroka, Leghva, Kakuti, Chakvi, Dagva, fencing, leachate contol or scale ISIBU tipper ‐ 0.8 m Kobuleti (City) 91,600 90,000 3 Ochkhamuri, Jikhanjuri, Tsetskhlauri, Kvirike, Sachino, 10m ; DAF tripper 220; metal container 3 Choloki,. Chakvi, Sachino, Alambari Jakhi 3 1m ‐ 180; standard 10m 3 3 60,000 m waste collected per year plastic 0.36 m 100

about 130‐150 illegal landfills located number of containers7 10% of Keda Sakrebulo and 7 villages in 65 villages (2‐3 per village) 104 (metal 1.1 m 3 59; (Dologani, Makhuntseti, Pirveli Maisi, Approximately Zvare, Tsoniarisi, Tskhomrisi, Dandalo) Keda (District) 20,194 90% is unsered 18 ‐ 2,100 0.8 m3; plastic ‐ 27 are covered by service where waste is collected 10 times per month

There is no landfill in the municipality One special truck number of 21 Town Shuakhevi and containers 800 m3 ‐ Khitchauri, Khichauri Suakhevi 30 22,600 About 2,600 ‐ Zamleti stretch of (District) the central road are served Disposal at Batumi landfill metal containers Makhinjauri community, Ortabatumi, Khelvacbauri 3 khalsheni, Feria, Sharabidzebi, 62,828 About 17,540 372, 1m (District) adjaristskali, Tkhilnaari, Jarnali, Sarfi, Kirnati are served 2 specialized trucks metal container 20 Town Khulo, Dekanashvilebi, 3 3 20 m 08.m ‐ 40; plastic Vashlovani, Paksadzeebi, Beshumi Khulo (District) 37,500 15,777 container 0.95 m3 ‐ 8 seasonally are served. Illegal landfills are in 83 villages

Solid Waste Collection and Recycling Systems Assessment Report 31

Waste Management Technologies in Regions, Georgia

ADJARA REGION MUNICIPAL SWM ECONOMIC BASICS Cleansing Service Budgets (Gel) Tariffs Municipality 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Population Businesses

1,380,000 budget, 1,380,000 budget, 1,750,000 budget, 2,000,000 budget, 3 GEL per person 3 Batumi (City) 2,000,000 budget, 25 GEL per 1 m 920,200 actual 1,042,600 actual 1,605,600 actual 1,755,800 actual per month

Kobuleti (City) 1,340,538 1,299,110 1,358,000 1 GEL per person

Tariff is based on Keda (District) 25,000 18,000 18,000 25,488 area

Sakrebuli decree Suakhevi (District) 26,756 21,944 26,920 30,293 31,224 0.48 4 2011

3 Khelvacbauri (District) 425,000 307,000 226,000 220,000 191,000 No collection 20 GEL per 1 m

48,534 ‐ cleaning; 14,040 cleaning; 23,079 ‐ cleaning; 26,951 ‐ cleaning; 23,663 ‐ cleaning; Sakrebuli decree Khulo (District) 43,900 ‐ 0.20 GEL 17,380 ‐ collection 18,500 ‐ collection 36,000 ‐ collection 43,000 ‐ collection 3, 2014 collection

Solid Waste Collection and Recycling Systems Assessment Report 32

Waste Management Technologies in Regions, Georgia

ANNEX 2 ONGOING OR RECENT SWM‐RELATED DONOR AND MULTINATIONAL DEVELOPMENT BANK SUPPORTED PROJECTS IN GEORGIA

SUPPORTING BUDGET PROJECT KEY TARGET OUTCOMES DONOR (Euro)  Identification of pilot project regions in Georgia, Azerbaijan, Armenia, Belarus, Moldova

and Russia for preparation of waste disposal site inventory

5,800,000 The ENPI East  Development of a 15‐year waste management strategy. (The region of Kveno‐Kartli Waste European Region was selected in Georgia.) Governance Commission 800,000  The adoption of a waste classification system by each country that meets international Project Georgia standards and compatible with EU standards.

 Public awareness activities.

 Improvement of MOERP’s institutional structure aiming at efficient management of

solid waste and hazardous substances handling

 Building of appropriate capacities of the beneficiary and key stakeholders to improve

Twining SWM and hazardous substance management

Project ‐ European  Development of a new legal framework for waste and hazardous substances Ministry of 1,250,000 Commission management Environment Protection  Development of a new National waste strategy, national waste management plan and waste classification system

 Development and implementation of relevant environmental legislation and harmonization with relevant EU laws and international standards.

Solid Waste Collection and Recycling Systems Assessment Report 33

Waste Management Technologies in Regions, Georgia

 The identification of appropriate sites for landfill development in the municipality of

Borjomi.

 The selection of a landfill site in Municipality and the completion of the Development of a New Government of the associated regulatory procedures, 1,200,000 Landfill in Netherlands  The construction of the Borjomi sanitary landfill and supply/construction of associated Borjomi facilities and equipment.

 Transfer of knowledge on best practices for operational management and landfill construction.  Build a new regional landfill for the region following requirements of the EC Directive

on landfills Waste 3,000,000 European Bank for Management Loan  Close down non‐compliant landfills in Batumi and Kobuleti and complete post‐closure Reconstruction and in Adjara works Development 5,300,000 Region Grant  Enhance the collection and transportation system for municipal solid waste

 Establish a new waste management company for the operation of the new landfill

1,600,000  Construction of new landfill for the municipality of

Loan  Planning and Construction of a waste sorting facility with manual sorting line European Bank for Municipality 1,700,000 Reconstruction and  Closure of disposal site (Gardabani will now transport their solid waste the of Rustavi SIDA Grant Development new Rustavi landfill.) 700,000 BP Grant  Construct new sanitary landfill in Kutaisi German Credit Bank for  Purchase of specialized vehicles for waste collection

Reconstruction ‐  Closure of the old Kutaisi landfill in Kutaisi as part of the first project. KfW  Assistance to the SWMCG for planning for new regional landfills throughout Georgia

Solid Waste Collection and Recycling Systems Assessment Report 34

Waste Management Technologies in Regions, Georgia

Swedish  Provides financial aid and support to Clean Up Georgia initiative and other capacity

International building and public awareness initiatives Varies – Development see above Cooperation Agency ‐ SIDA

Solid Waste Collection and Recycling Systems Assessment Report 35

Waste Management Technologies in Regions, Georgia

ANNEX 3

PROJECT SUB‐ACTIVITY ACTION PLANS

The following charts presents a listing of the recommended activities for each objective along with a tentative schedule for the next Project year.

Solid Waste Collection and Recycling Systems Assessment Report 37

Waste Management Technologies in Regions, Georgia

Component 1 ‐ Activity 1.4 ‐ 2014‐2015 Implementation Action Plan Focu s 2014‐15 Project Mont h Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun July Aug Sep Project Wee k 7 14 21 22 28 4 11 18 25 2 9 16 23 30 6 13 20 27 3 10 17 24 3 10 17 24 31 7 14 21 28 5 12 19 26 2 9 16 23 30 7 14 21 28 4 11 18 25 1 8 15 22 29 Activity 1.4 Design Region‐s pecific ISWM Strategies and Action Plans KAKHETI 1 Define detailed strategic approach for local SWM plans and validate with USAID 2 Secure cooperative agreements with Kakheti municipalities for development of SWM Plans 3 Establish local working groups for SWM plan development and consultation 4 Establish probable requirements and criteria for local SWM plans with MOERP 5 Inventory and develop local maps showing current collection service coverage area 6 Identify and categorize areas (villages, etc.) where collection service is not provided 7 Determine whether village based community SWM systems exist in unserved locations 8 Indentify potential village candidate for community based SWM pilot 9 Inventory, categorize and develop map showing existing informal dump areas 10 Correlate informal dump inventory information with Green Movement database 11 Identify and characterize any recycling and composting activities in each municipalities 12 Identify any local potential markets for recyclables and compost in each municipality 13 Define current tariff structures and collection experience in each Kakheti Munipality 14 Coordinate local ISWM plan development with ongoing Component 3 and 4 work efforts

ADJARA 1 Secure cooperative agreements from Adjara municipalities for tender/contracting training 2 Establish regional working group for tender and contracting capacity building and training 3 Evaluate current tender, contracting and supervision approach in each municipality 4 Present wo rkshop on tender and contracting approaches and issues 5 Work with municipalities to establish standardized tender and contracting process

Component 1 ‐ Activity 1.5 ‐ 2014‐2015 Implementation Action Plan Project Yea r 2014‐15 Project Mon th Oc t Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun July Aug Sep Project Wee k 7 14 21 22 28 4 11 18 25 2 9 16 23 30 6 13 20 27 3 10 17 24 3 10 17 24 31 7 14 21 28 5 12 19 26 2 9 16 23 30 7 14 21 28 4 11 18 25 1 8 15 22 29 Activity 1.5 Conduct Capacity and Training Gap Analysis of Municipalities and SWM Companies KAKHET I 1 Complete detailed assessment of municipal financial processes and functions 2 Complete detailed assessment LLC financial functions 3 Complete detailed assessment of municipal tender and contracting functions 4 Complete detailed inventory and assessment of municipal/LLC assets (vehicles and containers) 5 Complete detailed assessment of LLC fleet management and maintenance programs 6 Complete detailed assessment of co llection program technical design and operations 7 Identify specific focus areas for detailed training and peer to peer matching

ADJARA 1 Complete detailed assessment of tender/contract functions in regional municipalities

Solid Waste Collection and Recycling Systems Assessment Report 38

Waste Management Technologies in Regions, Georgia

Component 1 ‐ Activity 1.6 ‐ 2014‐2015 Implementation Action Plan Project Year 2014‐15 Project Month Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun July Aug Sep Project Week 7 14 21 22 28 4 11 18 25 2 9 16 23 30 6 13 20 27 3 10 17 24 3 10 17 24 31 7 14 21 28 5 12 19 26 2 9 16 23 30 7 14 21 28 4 11 18 25 1 8 15 22 29 Activity 1.6 Provide Tailored Assistance and Training to Municipalities and SWM Companies KAKHETI 1 (See Activity 1.4 for SWM plan development for Kakheti municipalities) 2 Provide workshop and training to Kakheti municipalities on ISWM plan development 3 Provide 1 day workshop on sorting plant design and viability in Kakheti 4 Provide training to LLCs in Kakheti on business plan development and service optimization 5 Establish village based community SWM model and plan for improved SWM in Kakheti 6 Secure cooperative agreement on provision of landfill operations assistance with SWMCG 7 Integrate landfill operations assistance with regional landfill implementation (KfS) Schedule detrmined by landfill implmentation schedule

ADJARA 1 Conduct workshop on sorting plant design and viability for Adjara municipalities 2 Conduct workshop on tender/contracting process and service accountability in Adjara 3 Establish village based community SWM model and plan for improved SWM 4 Secure cooperative agreement on provision of landfill operations plan dev. with Hygiene LTD 5 Integrate landfill operations assistance with regional landfill implementation (EBRD) Schedule detrmined by landfill implmentation schedule

Component 1 ‐ Activity 1.7 ‐ 2014‐2015 Implementation Action Plan Project Yea r 2014‐15 Project Mont h Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun July Aug Sep Project Wee k 7 14 21 22 28 4 11 18 25 2 9 16 23 30 6 13 20 27 3 10 17 24 3 10 17 24 31 7 14 21 28 5 12 19 26 2 9 16 23 30 7 14 21 28 4 11 18 25 1 8 15 22 29 Activ ity 1.7 Assist Waste Collection Companies in Deve loping and Implem enting Business Plans and Strategies for Service Improvement and Expansion

KAKHETI 1 Secure cooperative agreements from Kakheti LLCs for development of Business Plans 2 Determine candidate village areas with accessibility for collection service coverage expansion 3 Define required assets (vehicles and containers) for expansion of service delivery coverage 4 Develop expansion plan preliminary feasibility study for identified accessible villages 5 Develop transitional implementation plans in each municipality for collection expansion

ADJARA 1 Secure cooperative agreement with municipality of Batumi concerning review of LLC Subject to agreement with Batumi, evaluate LLC in accordance with Kakheti tasks 2,4,5,6 2 2,4,5,6 of Activity 1.5

Solid Waste Collection and Recycling Systems Assessment Report 39

Waste Management Technologies in Regions, Georgia

Component 1 ‐ Activity 1.8 ‐ 2014‐2015 Implementation Action Plan Project Year 2014‐15 Project Month Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun July Aug Sep Project Week 7 14 21 22 28 4 11 18 25 2 9 16 23 30 6 13 20 27 3 10 17 24 3 10 17 24 31 7 14 21 28 5 12 19 26 2 9 16 23 30 7 14 21 28 4 11 18 25 1 8 15 22 29 Activity 1.8 ‐ Design and Implement a City‐to ‐City Exchange Program KAKHETI Identify specific and relevant focus areas for peer‐to‐peer cooperation and assistance 1 (probable areas of cooperation (SWM plan development, fleet management, landfill operations and maintenance, SWM environmental effects and GHG mitigation) 2 Establish basis and means for cooperative dialogue and assistance

ADJARA Same as above subject to Batumi agreement relative to LLC and acceptance of landfill 1 operations and maintenance training by Hygiene LTD

Component 1 ‐ Activity 1.9 ‐ 2014‐2015 Implementation Action Plan Project Year 2014‐15 Project Month Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun July Aug Sep Project Week 7 14 21 22 28 4 11 18 25 2 9 16 23 30 6 13 20 27 3 10 17 24 3 10 17 24 31 7 14 21 28 5 12 19 26 2 9 16 23 30 7 14 21 28 4 11 18 25 1 8 15 22 29 Activity 1.9 ‐ Implement Pilots via Partial Grants to Assist Recycling Companies KAKHETI (Focus Area of Component 2 ‐ See Component 2 assessment report) 1 identify and categorize recycling companies in Kakheti, if any, for grant process 2 Identify and characterize all scrap metal or other materials recovery centers 3 Identify any existing compost operations assostiated with wineries and agribusiness 4 Define extent of green waste in each municipality 5 Identify potential grantees for compost based pilot

ADJARA (Focus Area of Component 2 ‐ See Component 2 assessment report)

Solid Waste Collection and Recycling Systems Assessment Report 40

Waste Management Technologies in Regions, Georgia

Component 1 ‐ Activity 1.10 ‐ 2014‐2015 Implementation Action Plan Project Year 2014‐15 Project Month Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun July Aug Sep Project Week 7 14 21 22 28 4 11 18 25 2 9 16 23 30 6 13 20 27 3 10 17 24 3 10 17 24 31 7 14 21 28 5 12 19 26 2 9 16 23 30 7 14 21 28 4 11 18 25 1 8 15 22 29 Activity 1.10 ‐ Support tb e Implementation of Small‐Scale Composting Activities KAKHETI 1 Identify any village locations in Kakheti with active community‐based SWM processes 2 Establish model for village based community SWM activities including backyard composting 3 Identify and select receptive village location for model implementation and pilot 4 Define required assets (backyard composters, etc.) to implement model 5 Secure cooperative agreement with municipality and village leaders, if any, for pilot 6 Define pilot criteria for measuring results 7 Engage community in implementation of model SWM program and pilot Quantify green waste and other organic waste stream in each municipality and determine 8 current practices 9 Establish green waste/select organics compost application as element of SWM Plan

ADJARA Same as above for potential Adjara villages

Component 1 ‐ Activity 1.11 ‐ 2014‐2015 Implementation Action Plan Project Year 2014‐15 Project Month Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun July Aug Sep Project Week 7 14 21 22 28 4 11 18 25 2 9 16 23 30 6 13 20 27 3 10 17 24 3 10 17 24 31 7 14 21 28 5 12 19 26 2 9 16 23 30 7 14 21 28 4 11 18 25 1 8 15 22 29 Activity 1.11 ‐ Develo p Landfill Remediation/Closure Plans KAKHETI 1 Develop cooperative agreement with SWMCG regarding assistance in official landfill closure 2 Establish probable criteria for landfill and random dump area closure with MOERP 3 Assist SWMCG in developing specific landfill closure plans for official landfills 4 Develop informal area closure and remediation strategy with Kakheti municipalities. Develop informal dump closure plan for areas currently served by collection program 5 (based on critical areas identified during Activity 1.4 ‐ Define required assets and schedule including transitional implementation approach based on area priorities)

ADJARA Develop cooperative agreement with Government of Adjara regarding assistance in official 1 landfill closure Establish probable criteria for landfill and random dump area closure with MOERP and 2 Adjara government 3 Assist Government of Adjara in developing specific landfill closure plans for official landfills

Solid Waste Collection and Recycling Systems Assessment Report 41

Waste Management Technologies in Regions, Georgia

ANNEX 4

PROPOSED ISWM TRAINING CONTENT MATRIX

The following table presents a listing of the recommended training and capacity building focus areas for development of required training elements. The first three focus areas relate to the Kakheti Municipalities and to a lesser degree, the Adjara Municipalities. Focus areas related to the disposal function is expected to apply to the SWMCG in the Kakheti Region and to Hygiene LTD in the Adjara Autonomous Republic.

Solid Waste Collection and Recycling Systems Assessment Report 42

Waste Management Technologies in Regions, Georgia

ISWM Plan elements Local Technical Assistance and Capacity Building Focus Areas

ü How to increase public awareness of solid waste issues How to increase operating revenues to pay for better service ü How to get waste generators to follow the rules and act responsibly WASTE GENERATION ü ü How to segregate and manage unique waste streams such as market waste and medical waste ü How to promote the 4Rs

How to get solid waste generators to realize their responsibility in primary collection ü ü How to stimulate community based common practices such as cart based collection and WASTE DIVERSION community clean- up activities ü How to develop micro-enterprise door to door collection at community levels ü How to maintain cooperation between the waste generators, primary collectors and the secondary collection program

ü How to optimize collection point placement and service ü How to monitor and increase the efficiency of secondary collection SECONDARY How to determine secondary collection asset (people and equipment) requirements COLLECTION AND ü How to select and maintain mechanized equipment for secondary collection and TRANSFER ü transfer ü How to determine whether transfer stations are required

ü How to locate new disposal sites ü How to do an environmental assessment for a new disposal site ü How to determine land area requirements ü How to get a community to accept a disposal site location DISPOSAL ü How to operate and maintain a disposal site ü How to select and maintain mechanized equipment for disposal operations ü How to control traffic at a disposal site ü How to control landfill gas and leachate ü How to control scavengers

Solid Waste Collection and Recycling Systems Assessment Report 43

Waste Management Technologies in Regions, Georgia

GLOSSARY OF SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT TERMS

The following is a glossary of conventional terms associated with solid waste management and the project.

A

Action Plan: The action plan sets out a detailed program of implementation steps over a 5 year time frame, within the framework of the overall strategy for the long term. The Action Plan details who needs to do what, by when, how much it will cost and who pays.

Active Landfills: Those landfills still accepting municipal solid waste.

Aerobic Decomposition: The first of the typical decomposition phases that occur in landfilled wastes. Refers to decomposition that takes place in the presence of oxygen. Carbon dioxide (CO2) is generated and oxygen is consumed.

Affordability: Ability of the community to pay for the MSWM services as proposed.

Anaerobic Decomposition: The second phase of decomposition that typically occurs in landfilled wastes. Refers to decomposition in the absence of oxygen with (when complete) results in the formation of mainly methane (CH4) and carbon dioxide (CO2) gases.

Aquifer: A geological formation, group of formations, or portion of a formation capable of yielding significant quantities of groundwater to springs or wells.

B

Best Practice: The planning and/or operational practice that is the most technically and politically feasible, cost‐effective, sustainable, environmentally beneficial and socially sensitive, to a particular locality.

Biodegradable: Capable of decomposing rapidly by microorganisms under natural conditions (aerobic and/or anaerobic). Most organic materials, such as food scraps and paper are biodegradable.

Biogas: Gas formed by digestion of organic materials. Typically dominated by CH4 and CO2 in a landfill.

C

Cap: A layer of clay, or other impermeable material installed over the top of a closed municipal solid waste landfill to prevent entry of rainwater and minimize leachate.

Capacity Building: Improving and building the technical and managerial skills and resources within an organization.

Capital cost: Investment cost. Includes items such as land, site development, infrastructure, plant and equipment and license costs.

Cells: 1. A volume within a landfill occupied by a specific amount of waste, e.g., waste disposed during one day. The cell boundaries are then defined by a daily cover. A series of adjoining cells, all the same heights, make up a lift. 2. A compartment within a landfill designed for a particular purpose, for example the treatment of organic wastes. The cell has defined boundaries which may be a low permeability base, a bund wall and low permeability cover.

Centralized Composting: System utilizing a central facility within a defined area with purpose of composting the putrescible fraction of MSW.

Solid Waste Collection and Recycling Systems Assessment Report 43

Waste Management Technologies in Regions, Georgia

Closure: The procedure a landfill operator must follow when a landfill reaches its legal capacity for municipal solid waste disposal which includes ceasing acceptance of municipal solid waste and placing a cap on the landfill site.

Collection Frequency: The number of MSW collections made from a specific location within a given time period.

Collection Timing: The pre‐determined time period when MSW is collected from a location or pick‐ up point.

Commercial Waste: All municipal solid waste emanating from business establishments such as stores, markets, office buildings, restaurants, shopping centers, and entertainment centers.

Community‐Based Organization: Community based interest groups formed by the members of a local community to take charge of their interests or to influence events.

Community Composting: System at a community level within a defined area with purpose of composting the putrescible fraction of MSW.

Composting: 1. The controlled biological decomposition of putrescible fraction of MSW in the presence of air to form a humus‐like material. Controlled methods of composting include mechanical mixing and aerating, ventilating the materials by dropping them through a vertical series of aerated chambers, or placing the compost in piles out in the open air and mixing it or turning it periodically (windrow composting). 2.The controlled degradation of putrescible fraction of MSW following some form of pre‐processing to remove non‐compostible MSW.

Construction and Demolition Waste: MSW originated from or use of building materials, dredging materials, tree stumps, and rubble resulting from construction, re‐modelling, repair, and demolition of homes, commercial buildings and other structures and pavements. The nature of this MSW depends upon the resources used in a given region or country for the purposes of construction. In the absence of adequate local ordinance, responsibility for the management of these wastes is invariably assumed to lie with the municipality.

Contaminant: Any physical, chemical, biological, or radiological substance or matter that has an adverse effect on air, water, or soil.

Cost Recovery: Recovering the cost of MSWM or other municipal services from the users. Cost recovery may be by direct or indirect charges.

Cover Material: Material used to cover municipal solid wastes disposed in landfills. Covering materials can be gravel, topsoil, excavation residues, or slag. Daily cover for a landfill might be important to reduce odors, nuisance, vectors, fires, landfill gas migration, and vegetation growth. Fifteen centimeters of compacted soil cover will generally achieve these desired functions. Soil texture determines the suitability of that soil for use as cover. Some areas allow the use of 'artificial cover' in lieu of compacted dirt. Examples are foam, geotextiles and plastic sheets.

D

Daily Cover: Daily cover for landfill is typically 15 cm layer of soil compacted over the waste. It might be important to reduce odors, nuisance, vectors, fires, landfill gas migration, and unsightliness of the facility and to promote safety and vegetation growth. Soil texture determines the suitability of that soil for use as cover. Sometimes 'artificial cover' may be used in lieu of compacted dirt, such as foam, geotextiles and plastic sheets.

Decomposition: The breakdown of matter by bacteria and fungi changing the chemical makeup and physical appearance of MSW in landfills, composting and/or fermentation processes.

Direct charges: The user of the service is charged for the use of the service, related directly to the

Solid Waste Collection and Recycling Systems Assessment Report 44

Waste Management Technologies in Regions, Georgia

extent of use. For MSWM, used widely for commercial and industrial wastes, less so for household wastes. See also Indirect Charges.

Disposal: 1. The final placement of MSW that is not salvaged or recycled. 2. The process of finally disposing MSW in a landfill. 3 MSW disposal is an ultimate action by which MSW is disposed on land in acceptable engineering manner with and/or without previous treatment/processing and/or recycling.

Diversion Rate: The percentage of waste materials diverted from traditional disposal such as landfilling or incineration to be recycled, composted, or re‐used.

Drop‐off: Recyclable materials collection method in which individuals bring them to a designated collection site.

Drop‐off Center: A method of collecting recyclables or compost in which the materials are taken by individuals to collection sites and disposed into designated containers.

Dump: A site used to dispose of municipal solid waste without management and/or environmental controls.

E

Economies of Scale: Reductions in the unit cost of the production of a commodity or delivery of a service resulting from production/delivery on an increasing scale.

End‐Use Market: A company that purchases recycled materials for use as feedstock in manufacturing new products.

Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA): An environmental analysis prepared to determine whether an action (such as a proposed development project) would significantly affect the environment and the mitigation measures to reduce the impacts to acceptable level.

F

Feasibility Study: 1.Analysis of the practicability of a proposal. The feasibility study usually recommends selection of a cost‐effective alternative. 2. A small‐scale investigation of a problem to ascertain whether a proposed research approach is likely to provide useful data.

Ferrous Metals: A term used to describe iron and its alloys, e.g., steels. It is also to describe the general class of metallic materials containing iron, cobalt and nickel as major components.

Final Cover: Also known as secondary cover. The purpose is to make the landfill area suitable for the intended after use. Must be compacted (except the top soil), uniformly applied, and sloped to drain. Final cover must be designed to reduce infiltration, encourage run‐off, while discouraging erosion, retain moisture for plant root growth and development, and reduce or enhance landfill gas migration. Depth and design requirements differ.

Financial evaluation: Evaluation which concerns the financing decision. Its purpose is to establish the sources and adequacy of funds necessary to meet the financial commitments incurred during both the implementation and operating stages of the investment.

Flood Plain: A region of low‐lying land around a body of water, usually a river, that is flooded on an annual basis, usually annually.

Formal Source Separation: A process of municipal solid waste separation (e.g. paper, glass, metals, etc.) in different containers carried out by a citizen. Containers are located at MSW generation sources (e.g. market places and shops, clusters of residential houses, etc.). The process is usually organized by the municipality in order to reduce the quantity of MSW requiring final disposal in landfill, and to encourage reuse, recycling and recovery of secondary raw materials.

Solid Waste Collection and Recycling Systems Assessment Report 45

Waste Management Technologies in Regions, Georgia

G

Gas Control and Recovery System: A series of vertical wells or horizontal trenches containing permeable materials and perforated piping. The systems are designed to collect landfill gases for treatment or for use as an energy source.

Gas Migration: Is the movement of gas, either above or underground, from one area to another e.g., from within a landfill to the outside of the boundaries of the fill area. Gas is driven by two primary mechanisms, pressure and diffusion. Landfill gas exits from a landfill by vertical migration, lateral migration and migration along paths of least resistance until openings permit the release to the atmosphere. Landfill gas is heavier than air and therefore it can settle in low spots including sewers, basements, meter boxes, etc., and cause explosion and fires.

Gate Fee: Charge made by a MSWM facility operator for each tonne of waste delivered to the facility.

Generation: 1. MSW generation is a process of creating heterogeneous mixture of materials which are considered to be of no further use to the MSW generator. MSW is usually discarded from households, residential areas, commercial activities, educational establishments, hospital and clinics, business, shops, industries, etc. 2. Non‐hazardous industrial waste, acceptable quantities of non‐ hazardous agricultural wastes, municipal wastewater (sewage) sludge and acceptable quantities of non‐hazardous industrial sludge are also included in municipal solid waste generation.

Generation Rate: The amount of MSW that is generated over a given period of time. For example, a household of individual may have a MSW generation rate of 1kg/capita in a day.

Generator: Any person or organization whose actions or process generate MSW.

Groundwater. The supply of fresh water found beneath the Earth's surface, usually in aquifers, which supply wells and springs. Because groundwater is a major source of drinking water, there is growing concern over contamination from leaching pollutants out of dumping and/or badly managed landfill sites.

Groundwater Monitoring Well: A well placed at an appropriate location and depth for taking water samples to determine groundwater quality in the area surrounding a landfill or other site.

H

Haul Distance: The distance over which wastes or landfill cover material must be transported either from a) the last pick‐up point of the collection vehicles, or b) from the transfer station, to the landfill.

Hazardous Waste: Waste generated during production or other activities by society that can pose a substantial or potential hazard to human health or the environment when improperly managed. Possesses at least one of four characteristics (ignitability, corrosivity, reactivity, or toxicity).

Household Waste (Domestic Waste): MSW composed of garbage and rubbish, which is generated as the consequence of household activities. In developing countries, up to two thirds of this category consists of putrescible fraction of MSW. In poor neighborhoods traditional cooking can also produce ash and where sanitation facilities are limited, the waste might also include fecal matter. Domestic waste may contain a significant amount of hazardous waste.

Hydraulic Conductivity: A measurement of how fast a liquid can pass through the pores of a solid. Typically the liquid is water and the solid is a soil of some type.

I

Impervious: Describes a material that does not allow another substance to penetrate or pass through.

Solid Waste Collection and Recycling Systems Assessment Report 46

Waste Management Technologies in Regions, Georgia

Inactive Landfill: 1. Landfills that have stopped accepting wastes. 2. Landfills where biological activity has ceased.

Indirect Charges: Payment for a service (in this case MSWM) is linked either to the general municipal charge (e.g., property tax), or to another service for which charges are paid on the extent of use, and where the sanction of disconnection exists for non‐payment (e.g., drinking water, sewage or electricity).

Industrial Waste: A heterogeneous mixture of different materials generated during an industrial operation. It may be gaseous, liquid, sludge, and/or solid. The composition is site specific and depends upon the natural resources, raw materials and markets which provide the base for a given city's industrial activity.

Inert Material: The term is commonly used to describe material which is unaffected by chemical and/or biological processes. Generally indicating that the presence of such material has no relevant influence on the process under study, e.g., glass does not contribute to methane formation and can be regarded as inert in that aspect.

Infectious Waste: Hazardous waste with infectious characteristics, including contaminated animal waste, human blood and blood products, isolation waste, pathological waste, and discarded sharps (needles, scalpels or broken medical instruments).

Informal Sector: The part of an economy that is characterized by private, usually small‐scale, labor‐ intensive, largely unregulated, and unregistered manufacturing or provision of services. In MSWM it refers to recycling activities.

Institutional Strengthening: Process designed to enhance the ability of an institution to meet its objectives more effectively through a combination of measures including technical assistance, training, improved management structure system and better legislative and regulatory frameworks.

Institutional Waste: Waste originating in schools, hospitals, prisons, research organizations and other public buildings. Where the institution involves residents, the waste composition is similar to those from households.

Integrated Solid Waste Management (ISWM): 1. A frame of reference for designing and implementing new waste management systems and for analyzing and optimizing existing systems Based on the concept that all the strategic aspects of the MSWM system should be analyzed together since they are interrelated and development in one component frequently affects other areas of the system. 2. A practice using several alternative waste management techniques to manage and dispose of specific components of the municipal solid waste stream. Waste management alternatives include source reduction, recycling, composting, energy recovery and landfilling.

K

Key Stakeholders: Those persons, groups or institutions who can significantly influence, or are important to the success of a project/program.

L

Landfill Gas Management: The active and complete involvement in all issues of landfill gas, including: extraction, monitoring, disposal and reporting to regulators.

Landfill Gases: Gases arising from the decomposition of the organic (putrescible) fraction of MSW; principally methane, carbon dioxide, and hydrogen sulfide. Such gases may cause explosions at landfills if not properly managed.

Landfills: Designed, controlled and managed disposal sites for MSW spread in layers, compacted to

Solid Waste Collection and Recycling Systems Assessment Report 47

Waste Management Technologies in Regions, Georgia

the smallest practical volume, and covered by material applied at the end of each operating day (see also sanitary landfill).

Leachate: Wastewater that collects contaminants as it trickles through MSW disposed in a landfill. Leaching may result in hazardous substances entering surface water, ground water, or soil.

Leachate Collection and Treatment System: A system that gathers leachate (usually in a landfill) and pumps it to the wastewater treatment facility. A process to reduce the pollution potential of leachate. Such processes can include leachate re‐circulation, spray irrigation over adjacent grassland, and biological and physical‐chemical processes.

Level of Service: This refers to the quantity and quality of the MSW collection service, the effectiveness of MSW handling, treatment and disposal operation.

Liner: A relatively impermeable barrier designed to contain leachate within a landfill. Liner materials include plastic and dense clay.

Litter: Wind blown municipal solid wastes (predominantly plastics and paper) at a waste handling, treatment or landfill facility.

Long Range Transfer: Transport of municipal solid waste from the collection round to transfer station using conventional, powered refuse collection vehicles with high capacities, usually over distances of 20 km or more. M

Macro‐routing (or route balancing): Creating collection routes by dividing a collection area into smaller areas representing one day or work for one crew.

Manual Separation: Hand separation of compostable or recyclable material from MSW.

Market: A market is created whenever potential sellers of a good or service are brought into contact with potential buyers. In MSW refers to a sustainable market for recovered materials and is essential to the success of recycling.

Market Wastes: Primarily putrescible MSW, such as leaves, skins, and unsold food, discarded at or near food markets.

Materials Recovery Facility (MRF): Facility that processes residentially collected mixed recyclables into new products.

Methane: A colorless, non‐poisonous, flammable gas (CH4) created by anaerobic decomposition of organic compounds. It is explosive and should be handled with care (see also "anaerobic decomposition", "biogas").

Minimization: A comprehensive program to minimize or eliminate wastes, usually applied to wastes at their point of generation. (See: waste minimization.)

Monitoring: 1. Periodic or continuous surveillance or testing to determine the level of compliance with statutory requirements. 2. A process including physical examination, measurements by portable instruments and analysis of sample to provide information for assessment of conditions.

Municipal Solid Waste (MSW): Includes non‐hazardous waste generated in households, commercial and business establishments, institutions, and non‐hazardous industrial process wastes, agricultural wastes and sewage sludge. In practice, specific definitions vary across jurisdictions.

MSW Composition: MSW is as a heterogeneous mixture of different types of discarded materials. The composition of MSW depends on the conditions of the city in question. In general, MSW is composed of the following fractions: paper, rubber, plastic, fabric, leather, vegetable/putrescible, wood, etc. (combustibles), coal ash, glass, metal, etc. (non‐combustibles).

Solid Waste Collection and Recycling Systems Assessment Report 48

Waste Management Technologies in Regions, Georgia

O

Open Burning: Uncontrolled fires in a dump.

Open Dump: A site used for disposal of waste without any management and/or environmental controls (see also dump).

Operating cost: They are the day to day expenses of an operation. They include items such as labor, fuel, materials, chemicals, utilities, repairs and maintenance, and insurance.

Organic Matter: Carbonaceous material contained in plant or animal matter and originating from domestic or industrial sources.

P

Participation Rate: A measure of the number of people participating in a recycling program compared to the total number that could be participating.

Passive Venting: A venting technique using the natural pressure created in landfills to expel gases and control gas migration.

Pathogens: Micro‐organisms that can cause disease in other organisms or in humans, animals and plants (e.g. bacteria, viruses, or parasites) found in municipal solid waste, sewage, in runoff from farms or rural areas populated with domestic and wild animals, and in water used for swimming.

Performance Indicators: Quantitative data related to service delivery, such as number of employees, length of streets or total tonnes of waste collected.

Performance Measures: The result of processing indicators, generally by relating them to either time or costs. Performance measures are the principal tool for performance monitoring. Examples include cost/tone of MSW disposed, length of streets swept /hour.

Performance Monitoring: Measuring the performance of a service on an on‐going basis, in order to encourage the efficient use of available resources.

Permeability: A measure of how well a liquid moves through the pores of a solid. Expressed as a number applied to landfills in terms of how quickly water moves through compacted MSW disposed; it is typically expressed as centimeters per second.

Permit: An authorization, license, or equivalent control document issued by governmental body or an approved state agency to implement the requirements of an environmental regulation; e.g, a permit to operate a landfill site or to operate a facility that may generate harmful emissions.

Pilot Program: A trial run of the planned program conducted on a small scale to forecast the workability of the planned program. Changes may be made to the program depending on the results of the pilot study.

Plastics: Non‐metallic chemically reactive compounds (polymers) molded into rigid or pliable construction materials, fabrics, etc. It represents considerable fraction of MSW in industrial countries.

Post‐Closure: The time period following the shutdown of a MSWM or manufacturing facility; for monitoring purposes, often considered to be 30 years (also used terms are after care and/or restoration).

Post‐Consumer Recycling: Reuse of materials generated from residential and consumer waste, e.g. converting wastepaper from offices into corrugated boxes or newsprint.

Primary Collection System: The means by which municipal solid waste is collected from its source (domestic and commercial premises) and transported to communal stations, transfer points or

Solid Waste Collection and Recycling Systems Assessment Report 49

Waste Management Technologies in Regions, Georgia

disposal sites. Usually primary collection systems are characterized in developing countries by hand carts, bicycles or small vehicles.

Primary Stakeholders: Those persons, groups or institutions directly affected, either positively (beneficiaries) or negatively (for example, those involuntarily resettled) by a proposed action or plan.

Private Sector Participation: A partnership between the public and private sectors in MSWM, which allows the private sector to participate in service delivery. Term preferred in MSWM context to 'privatization', which implies that the public sector is no longer responsible for ensuring provision of the service.

Producer Responsibility: In order to reduce generation of packaging and other commercial waste, many governments have introduced the legislation requiring certain type of 'producers' to minimize their packaging and/or accept back their own products which have no more value for consumers. In effect, the responsibility e.g., for packaging waste is transferred for the municipality to the 'producer'.

Public Awareness and Education: Public Awareness and Education campaigns can take many shapes and forms. Just a few examples are information leaflets, public hearings, radio programs, advertisements, lectures and school curriculum interventions.

Putrescible: A fraction of MSW which can decompose under aerobic or anaerobic conditions, used as a feedstock for composting or anaerobic digestion processes.

Q

Quality Assurance/Quality Control: A system of procedures, checks, audits, and corrective actions to ensure that all research design and performance, environmental monitoring and sampling, and other technical and reporting activities are of the highest achievable quality.

R

Recovery: Chemical/biological processes such as biogas (methane) generation carrying out at the landfill to recover gas (energy/heat). Municipal wastewater sludge generated at the municipal wastewater treatment facility are usually added to enhance process of gas generation. Putrescible fraction of the MSW is also used to produce compost and/or methane by fermentation (anaerobic digestion). 2. The process by which MSW otherwise destined for disposal are collected, re‐processed or re‐manufactured, and reused.

Recovery Rate: Percentage of useable recycled materials that have been removed from the total amount of municipal solid waste generated in a specific area or by a specific business.

Recurrent Costs: The costs incurred in operating MSWM services. They can include: direct operational expenditures, such as expenditure on wages, fuel and maintenance; provisions (accrued expenses) for liabilities such as employee pension obligations and insurance payments; regular recurrent cash outlays, such as debt repayment and service charges (capital and interest); and a provision (depreciation) for recovering the value of the capital assets progressively used up in delivering the service.

Recyclables: MSW fractions that still have useful physical and/or chemical properties after serving their original purpose and that can therefore, be reused or re‐manufactured into additional products.

Recycling: Separation physical/mechanical process by which secondary raw materials (paper, metals, glass, plastics/synthetics) are obtained from MSW. The process could be accomplished manually, by simple and/or sophisticated mechanical equipment.

Regulator Function: Refers to the responsibility for ensuring that MSWM happens in a manner

Solid Waste Collection and Recycling Systems Assessment Report 50

Waste Management Technologies in Regions, Georgia

which is in conformance with legal requirements. In practical terms, this largely relates to the prevention of illegal waste disposal (dumping) activities, inspecting and monitoring the operation of landfill sites and other waste management facilities to ensure the conditions of the site license or permit.

Residential Waste: MSW generated in single and multiple‐family homes.

Residue: The materials remaining after processing, incineration, composting or recycling of MSW. Residues are usually disposed of in landfills.

Resource Recovery: The process of obtaining matter or energy from MSW.

S

Sanitary Landfill: A term for land MSW disposal site that is located to minimize water pollution from runoff and leaching. MSW is spread in thin layers, compacted, and covered with a fresh layer of soil each day to minimize pest, aesthetic, disease, air pollution, and water pollution problems (see also: landfill).

Scavenging: (see waste picking, waste picker).

Scrap: Materials (principally metallic) discarded from manufacturing operations that may be suitable for reprocessing.

Secondary Collection: The collection of municipal solid waste from communal collection points and/or generator premises and transport (often as part of a collection round) to a transfer station, recycling center, intermediate treatment facilities or disposal site.

Secondary Raw Materials: 1. Materials that have been manufactured and used at least once and are to be used again. 2. Secondary materials (e.g. paper, glass, metals, etc.) obtained from municipal solid waste by the processes of reuse, recycling and/or recovery carried out at the municipal solid waste treatment/process facilities.

Separated Waste Collection, Transfer and/or Transport: The process of collecting and removing MSW which have been separated in order to facilitate their re‐use, recycling, processing or disposal.

Shredder: A mechanical device used to break MSW materials into smaller pieces by tearing and impact action. Shredding MSW is done to minimize its volume or make it more readily combustible.

Siting: The process of choosing a location for a MSW treatment/processing facility and/or landfill (site selection).

Source Reduction: Reducing the amount of waste entering the MSW stream by redesigning products or patterns of production or consumption (e.g. using returnable beverage containers). Synonymous with waste reduction.

Source Separation: Segregating various wastes at the point of generation (e.g. separation of paper, metal and glass from other wastes to make recycling simpler and more efficient).

Stakeholders: Persons, groups or institutions with interests (often financial) in a project or program (see Primary Stakeholders; Secondary Stakeholders).

Synthetic Liner: A type of liner consisting of plastic membrane, instead of soil and are used in landfilling. Synthetic liners are less permeable, thinner and more flexible than soil liners.

T

Tipping Fee: A fee for unloading MSW at a landfill, transfer station or recycling facility.

Tonnage: The amount of waste that a landfill accepts, usually expressed in tons per month. The rate at which a landfill accepts waste is limited by the landfill's permit.

Solid Waste Collection and Recycling Systems Assessment Report 51

Waste Management Technologies in Regions, Georgia

Toxic Pollutants: Materials that cause death, disease, or birth defects in organisms that ingest or absorb them. The quantities and exposures necessary to cause these effects can vary widely.

Transfer: The movement of MSW between different stages in the handling, collection and transportation process.

Transfer Point: A designated point, often at the edge of a neighborhood, where small collection vehicles (such as hand carts) transfer MSW to larger vehicles for transport to transfer station, recycling center and/or landfill sites.

Treatment: Any method, technique, or process designed to remove solids and/or pollutants from MSW streams, effluents, and air emissions.

U

User Charges: Payment for a service by the users of that service. Are a preferred means of raising new revenue because they can be presented and justified to the public on the grounds that they are required for and will be used in the provision of an important public service such as MSWM. See also Direct Charges and Indirect Charges.

V

Vehicle Maintenance: Maintenance of vehicles and equipment are actions needed to ensure that usually problematic (partly as a result of procurement) or overly sophisticated vehicles (which cannot be serviced locally and whose spare parts are expensive and difficult to obtain) are kept 0perational.

Vehicle Productivity: A measure of the efficiency of use of MSW collection vehicles. Productivity may relate to indicators such as weight or volume of MSW carried by the vehicle in a given time period.

Vehicle Route: The route followed by MSW carrying vehicles during collection or disposal activity.

Volume Reduction: Processing MSW to decrease the amount of space they occupy, usually by compacting, shredding or incineration.

W

Waste: 1. Unwanted materials left over from any human activity. 2. Refuse from places of human or animal habitation. Waste may be generically defined as heterogeneous mixture of material which is discarded as superfluous and has no further use or value to its owner. The EC Framework Directive on Waste defines waste as "any substance or object which the holder discards or intends or is required to discard". In waste planning there are various categorizations of waste (e.g. municipal solid waste, controlled waste, hazardous waste etc.), and the terms relevant to this guide have been defined elsewhere in this glossary.

Waste Collector: A person employed by a local authority or a private firm to collect MSW from residences, businesses, and community bins.

Waste Management Hierarchy: The waste management hierarchy is a symbol for the strategic options available for dealing with MSW and their desirability. An adapted version of the hierarchy presents the more `desirable' waste management practices at the top of the hierarchy (avoid, minimize and/or recover material) and the least `desirable' practices at the bottom (treatment and/or disposal in landfill), with dumping "floating" around the bottom, not even recognized by the MSWM concepts as an option in industrialized countries of the West.

Waste Minimization: Measures or techniques that reduce the amount of wastes generated during industrial production processes; the term is also applied to recycling and other efforts to reduce the

Solid Waste Collection and Recycling Systems Assessment Report 52

Waste Management Technologies in Regions, Georgia

amount of waste going into the waste management system (also waste reduction).

Waste Picker: A person who picks out recyclables/ reusable materials from mixed MSW whenever it may be temporarily accessible or disposed of (see also: scavenging; informal sector).

Waste Picking: A process of extraction of recyclables and reusable materials from a mixed MSW for further use and/or processing.

Waste Stream: The total flow of MSW from homes, businesses, institutions, and manufacturing plants that are recycled, burned, or disposed of in landfills, or segments thereof such as the "residential waste stream" or the "recyclable waste stream".

Waste Types: In general, MSW include the following main groups of different waste types: household waste, commercial waste, institutional waste, street sweepings, construction debris, sanitation residues and industrial waste (see also MSW Composition).

Weigh Scales: (Also weightbridge) The means for reaching an accurate estimate of the quantity of waste entering a disposal or large transfer site. These scales are large enough to accommodate vehicles of all sizes coming to the site.

Wetlands: An area that is regularly wet or flooded and has a water table that stands at or above the land surface for at least part of the year.

Windrow Composting: A method of composting municipal solid waste by placing it in large, elongated piles and turning it manually to allow aeration.

Working Face: The length and width of the raw in which municipal solid waste is being disposed at a landfill. Also known as the tipping face.

XYZ

Yard Waste (Yard Trimmings): The part of MSW composed of grass clippings, leaves, twigs, branches, and garden refuse.

Solid Waste Collection and Recycling Systems Assessment Report 53